Rule of law in Taiwan
I live in a building complex in Taichung County and recently it was time to renew the contracts for the service providers and building management company. Several board members wanted to change some providers because of dissatisfaction with the quality of service provided. The board agreed to review all the contracts and send out requests for bids for the providers the board was uncertain it wanted to renew. One of these was the building management company itself.
The service providers were surveyed and votes taken. The board initially agreed on gardening and cleaning, soil and garbage removal, swimming pool guard and recycling providers without argument. It was, however, unable to come to an agreement on a provider for elevator repair services and building management services.
There was a vote and a new elevator services provider selected. A vote was also supposed to be taken to select a building management company. Some board members walked out after realizing the current firm was going to lose, but a quorum for the meeting remained and a new management company was voted in.
The next day a representative from the building management company presented contracts to the board chairman. These named the old elevator services provider and the old building management company as selected providers despite the fact that they had lost the vote at the previous night’s election. The building management company contends these contracts are valid even though their representative was well aware of the outcome of the board’s vote.
The members of the board who voted to change providers submitted the minutes of the June 23 meeting to the building management company to be posted, but it refused. Board members then put copies of the meeting results into residents’ mailboxes. As recorded by security cameras, the building manager and the board chairman removed these announcements by sticking their hands in residents’ mailboxes. We do not know what else they removed because apparently the items were shredded. The police were called and shown the evidence, but we had to practically beg them to even write down the details and it is possible they didn’t bother to file a police report.
The next evening, the board members who voted for a change again attempted to distribute the meeting results (addressed and in envelopes). The next morning (as recorded by the building security cameras), a resident who works for the building management company removed 175 pieces of mail and put them in a plastic bag as building security guards watched. The bag was in the hands of the building manager when one of our residents encountered him. It contained a number of pieces of personal mail along with the items the board members had placed in the mailboxes. The police were called again. Complaints were filed and the police placed an announcement — though only after strong encouragement — indicating that complaints could be filed against the resident in question if people living in the building came to the police station.
At this time, the building management company remains unchanged. Many residents are fearful and feel personally unsafe. The building manager and the security guards who participated in or watched this happen are still on staff. Personally, I do not feel supported by the police and the rule of law and am also concerned for the safety of my family.
Tom Carroll
Wurih Township,
Taichung County
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
RSS