“First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out ... Then they came for the Jews, but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”
These are the famous words of German pastor Martin Niemoeller during World War II about not stepping forward sooner and speaking out against the Nazis.
Considering the various controversial social and judicial incidents that have arisen in the past three years, many cannot help but be reminded of Niemoeller’s statement as concern brews over what further absurdity could happen next if a majority of the public continues to stay silent on what happens to other people.
Such apprehensions were renewed as the public was treated to news that three protesters who appealed to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) last year over the issue of land expropriation for the construction of an elevated railway in Taoyuan had been indicted, with prosecutors recommending a seven-year sentence for each one of them.
While prosecutors charged the protesters with obstruction of public affairs and violating the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), accusing them of inciting a scuffle with police, the defendants told a press conference on Tuesday that they had been tricked by the police, who apparently changed the protest venue at the last minute and started pushing the crowd before turning around to pin the blame on the protesters.
As the case awaits a final ruling from the judges who convened a hearing yesterday, indictments with such heavy sentences for people airing their grievances are nonetheless dumbfounding. The indictments are even more absurd when one considers another report yesterday in which a Taiwanese software engineer convicted of gathering classified information on Taiwan’s Patriot missile defense system on Beijing’s behalf was sentenced to a mere one-and-a-half years in jail.
So, a convicted spy receives only a slap on the wrist, whereas civil protesters face hefty sentences? What has become of the nation’s social justice?
When individuals waving national flags had them boorishly snatched away by police when Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) visited Taipei in November 2008, many among the public chose to remain silent, thinking such incidents only happen to political activists. When farmlands in different parts of the country were razed by bulldozers because of the government’s controversial expropriation projects, many also kept quiet. They thought themselves lucky they were not farmers, and hence, need not get involved. And now with the plight facing the residents of Taoyuan, some may still think it is none of their business and thank God they are not among the affected residents.
For people harboring such social apathy, it may only be a matter of time before it hits home and they find themselves at the center of controversy and under the hot glare of the media spotlight.
Timely outspokenness and persistent pressure are needed to deal with any arrogant and unjust display of power before more people suffer social injustice and the nation’s standing as a free and democratic country deteriorates further.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS