While local media outlets over the past week focused on the controversial bill to reform the premium scale of the National Health Insurance (NHI) scheme in the hopes of rescuing the debt-ridden system, few noticed a number of proposals at the very bottom of the legislature’s agenda — proposals that might have significant symbolic meaning.
Out of the 57 proposals that should have been reviewed over the past week, two were proposed to voice support for human rights, particularly those of jailed Chinese activist Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波), who won this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, and other dissidents in China.
The Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) proposal, if passed, would “urge” China to “be nice to dissidents,” and to let Liu “out of prison as soon as possible.”
The proposal also called on China to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as soon as possible, and to carry out political reforms and democratization.
The proposal, which was initiated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), would require a binding legislative resolution obliging the administration to issue a formal request for the release of Liu and another request for ratification of the international covenant and for “concrete measures” taken by China to improve its human rights conditions.
The fact that legislators were preoccupied with political interests when wrangling over the NHI bill this week, while failing to pass the two proposals before Friday — International Human Rights Day — deserves serious scrutiny.
Neither party put forth any motion to move the two proposals from the very bottom of the agenda to the top.
One can’t help but wonder what could have been their motives.
The proposals, though similar, would have conveyed meanings of different magnitude, if they had cleared the legislative floor in time.
The KMT’s proposal would demonstrate the pubic’s concerns, though it would have been weaker because of its wording — pointing to Liu’s and other Chinese dissidents’ human rights conditions and expressing the public’s hope that China will democratize within a short period of time.
The DPP’s proposal would have symbolized pressure from the general public to compel the KMT government to show support for Liu and other dissenters in formal documents.
Moreover, the DPP’s proposal would have also pressured the government to tell Beijing loudly and clearly that Taiwan would like to see concrete actions taken to protect human rights in China instead of issuing a simple call to set Liu free.
Legislators gave up a very good opportunity to give the two proposals momentum by making them binding legislative resolutions, especially when China blocked Liu or any close family member from receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo on Friday, as well as blocking 1.3 billion people in China from accessing reports of the award ceremony.
When awarding the Asia Democracy Award to India’s Rescue Foundation on Friday, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said: “Our concern for human rights transcends nationality and borders.”
What he should have also said was: “Our concern for human rights goes beyond political division” and accounted for the reasons why the two human rights proposals, which stand for a universal value and should not need further debate, were put on hold, buried under piles of bills.
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,
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
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS