H5N2 and politics
Recent issues involving ractopamine, US beef, lean-meat additives and now H5N2 in chickens and a possible cover-up point to a problem at the heart of Taiwanese society: promotion of economic interests over the safety of the general public by a leadership and government to secure its political ambitions.
It is interesting that ractopamine and H5N2 are not being understood predominantly in a political context since the issues seem to have developed during an election campaign.
It is eerily similar to how the Chinese milk scandal was pushed aside during an important event — the 2008 Beijing Olympics. For Taiwan, it was the Jan. 14 elections.
The latest outbreak of H5N2 seems to have started in December last year. This was at the moment the campaign was revving up and the notorious Yu Chang Biologics case emerged.
If the outbreak had been made public during the election, it could have turned the “soft capital” of Democratic Progressive Party presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) socially-oriented pledges into hard capital, as they would have been potentially transformed into a narrative of a threat to families.
When reading about academics protesting against ractopamine, it makes one wonder why they have not been directing this kind of energy at the behavior of the Council of Agriculture over the H5N2 issue — not just this specific Cabinet agency, or simply only this level of government. Rather, they should be directing their energy toward how the media orientates itself and engages other representational entities across Taiwanese society to make real change.
The reality is that such an ambitious move would likely threaten their access to resources, if not their position within universities — as the universities know all too well they must toe the political line or risk censure. The logical outcome is to attack an easy external threat. It is easy as it has been replicated in other countries and similar issues have also had a history in Taiwan.
If you remember, during the election, other ministries sought to preserve and expand the political capital of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration. Former Council for Economic Planning and Development minister Christina Liu (劉憶如) is now infamous for implicating Tsai using inaccurate documentation during the election campaign. It all started when the Legislative Yuan voted to open sealed documents, the contents of which they, curiously, had no idea about.
The information was presented by Liu and later she simply brushed aside inaccuracies by saying her office had too few resources for the amount of data involved — yet she was willing to rush out a conclusion before accessing all the information.
This week, we find another government body has failed to fulfill its bureaucratic responsibilities.
Or has it? The H5N2 issue did not come up during the election.
This is part of a historical pattern found within the Taiwanese government. A legacy of political ambition and goals reflected in the bureaucracy. Political goals are pushed downward, shaping behavior in a way that reinforces the ambitions of leaders in power, rather than bureaucratic competency being the primary goal.
It is very rare for a department within the government to offer direction to the political elite. Take Academia Sinica and its relocation to Taiwan — its most influential department was Chinese literature when it was re-established, which is a curious thing for a country of new immigrants needing to make a new life for themselves. The reason? The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) leadership’s ideological message was that it was the rightful protector of Chinese history and culture, in combating the evils of the Chinese Communist Party and the People’s Liberation Army.
The next curious event was the shift to science, technology and research and development, after messages from the leadership previously ignored such aspects. The reason? China had become a nuclear power, outstripping the KMT on the global stage. This cemented what would become part of former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger’s legacy. The Republic of China needed to reconceptualize its message as the “better” China, through technology and industry. What has happened over the past few months has everything to do with these major events in Taiwan’s modern history — the establishment of political corporatism.
One should not forget that the post-secondary system is also very much part of the bureaucratic apparatus in Taiwan. It is very different from say Europe or North America, as the top-down pressure is quite visible and pronounced, when political messages translate into rapid implementation at the university level, leading to a cascading effect on academic departments.
These are not spaces where apolitical, abstract or contentious ideas can be generated and thrive. Rather they are spaces where political goals and ambitions are to be promoted, pushing aside anything that does not serve political ambition. The purpose of these academic offices, which academics are all too familiar with — the generation of ideas — are secondary.
The H5N2 issue is directly linked to the ractopamine issue and the political ambitions of those holding office, and has very little to do with ensuring Taiwanese are safe.
Philippe McKay
Pingtung
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
RSS