The shot fired at Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Central Committee member Sean Lien (連勝文) at a campaign rally has once again tarnished the image of democracy and elections in Taiwan, casting reason aside and eroding the dignity of Taiwanese. People were just beginning to forgive and forget after the March 19, 2004, shooting of then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his vice president, Annette Lu (呂秀蓮), when the shot fired at Lien on Nov. 26 once more stirred up resentment and enmity. That evening added another black mark to Taiwan’s history, bringing gloom and despondency to all. How long will it be until Taiwan can finally be free of such tragedies?
The shot fired that night brought fear in its wake, as could be seen in the solemn faces all around. At the same time, many people set about pondering on the shooting and trying to figure out what effect it might have had on the votes cast for the contending parties. What a sad day for Taiwan. Is that all a human life is worth? Is there no more to life in this country than political drama? Is nothing else important?
Besides the serious injury caused to Lien as the bullet tore through his face, an innocent bystander was also hit and killed. The bullet pierced Taiwan’s very heart and highlighted its tragic past and present. Confrontation is still with us. When will it ever go away? This gunshot may well have dire and unpredictable consequences that will remain with us for a long time.
What can we learn from this election? Frankly speaking, its negative aspects outweigh the positive. There were many bad examples of politicians stirring up trouble, sharpening the confrontation between supporters of the pan-blue and pan-green camps and creating a hostile division in which neither side could tolerate the other.
Will this be Taiwan’s fate forever? Are we really willing to be dragged down to such depths? I live here and I certainly don’t have the confidence to tell the world about Taiwan and its elections. The gulf between the two sides has become so deep that it seems impossible to bridge. Who is responsible for this tragic outcome? Without doubt, neither governing nor opposition parties can deny their responsibility; still less do they have any grounds for blaming their rivals. The election is over and the votes have been counted, but the bullet fired that evening has burned a deep wound in people’s hearts. How can we now stand before the world and claim that Taiwan is a model of democracy?
One election is over and done with, but the next will follow before very long. Politicians of both camps — government and opposition — must look beyond the goal of holding on to or gaining control of political power. They must without delay take responsibility for the vulgar language and violence that undermine moral values and social order and come up with a remedy that will fully remove these ills. If not, the next insult or violent act may have unimaginable consequences.
People have had enough of such irrational and unjustifiable violence that creates discord in Taiwan and ruins its reputation. The public must boldly tell politicians that we want to see reason, security and harmony in our lives, and we want a competent, capable and conscientious government. More than that, we want an environment of tolerance in which everyone can compete on an even playing field. These demands are quite fundamental, but we must ask those in authority — what have you done to make them a reality? Is it really too much to ask?
When elections draw to a close, inevitably some will be pleased with the result and others disappointed. Although the shot fired that night may make us ashamed and fearful, we cannot just go on wallowing in an atmosphere of tragedy. We should not give up our insistence on reason and moderation, truth and justice.
It is time to say no to vulgar insults and thuggery and to let the Taiwanese virtues of honesty, tolerance and tenacity come to the fore. We demand of all those in authority that they ensure a secure and stable environment for Taiwan and all the people who live and work here. This is what the public ardently desires. Let us ask of those who have been newly elected, as well as those already in office: Can you pledge to do these things and will you hold true to your promises?
Li Hua-chiu is a researcher with the National Policy Foundation.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under