This month has not been kind to the family of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). It began somewhat upbeat on Nov. 5 when the Taipei District Court returned a not guilty verdict on charges of corruption and money laundering against Chen and his wife, Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍). The administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) instantly criticized the ruling, saying Chen and Wu had escaped a guilty verdict not because they were innocent, but because of a legal mistake. However, on Nov. 11, Chen and Wu were not so lucky when the Supreme Court upheld two bribery convictions, sentencing them to 11 years and eight years in prison for each charge. A few days later on Nov. 16, the Kaohsiung District Court ruled against Chen’s son, Chen Chih-chung (陳致中), in a libel suit he brought against Next Magazine, which earlier this year accused him of soliciting a prostitute.
Given its long affiliation with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the demise of the Chen family has been a political bonanza for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). No sooner did the court issue its Nov. 5 verdict than the KMT cried foul, declaring anti-corruption a theme for its election rally planned for yesterday. The Nov. 11 decision only increased the KMT’s indignation by confirming the injustice of the first not-guilty verdict.
Spin doctors have also used the Chen family’s misfortune to attack others. When DPP Chairperson and Sinbei City mayoral candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) refused last week to appear in a public debate with her KMT opponent, Eric Chu (朱立倫), Ma accused her of ducking questions about Chen.
The KMT brought unprecedented levels of corruption to Taiwan, so its outrage about the misdeeds of others is laughable, in particular given that Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) of the KMT is embroiled in his own corruption scandal involving construction projects for the Taipei International Flora Expo. These scandals have put a bump in his re--election bid. Unless we believe it is merely a coincidence that the Chen rulings were announced immediately before this week’s special municipality elections, then recent claims that the courts are finally acting independently of KMT control are clearly premature.
However, the DPP still has a problem, which is how to protect itself from the legal and political liabilities attached to its former leader. As a party chairman, a key ideologue, strategist, spokesman and as by far the DPP’s most successful candidate for office — winning the Taipei mayorship and the presidency twice — Chen Shui-bian is so closely identified with the DPP that an attempt to cut ties would only look disingenuous.
It would also be ungrateful. Chen was once dubbed “the son of Taiwan,” a name he most certainly earned. A democratic activist who served time prison during the KMT’s Martial Law era, he worked much of his life to reform a political system that was oppressive and corrupt. His sacrifices and those of his wife are a matter of public record.
Tsai’s response to hostile questions concerning the former president have been precisely correct: She supports Chen Shui-bian’s judicial rights as a citizen under the Constitution and she respects the judicial process in which he is tried. In better times, the former president would have agreed.
However, something more is needed and not just an acknowledgment of Chen Shui-bian’s honorable past. It may be that his greatest legacy will be to show that truly no one is above the law. There is no room for demagogues in democracy; and regardless of how successful, well meaning or momentarily powerful, we are all corruptible. This is the value of adequate checks and balances in the Constitution. It is also why judicial reform should be high on the national agenda.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers