With the much-vaunted Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) evidently failing to deliver on the government’s promise to improve the economy, and with inflationary concerns on the rise, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration has decided to reduce costs. This makes sense, but there is a problem: These cuts are targeting the key symbols of nationhood.
Nearly four years into Ma’s first term and less than a month before he embarks on his second, the state of Taiwan’s economy is rather underwhelming — especially for an administration that never misses an opportunity to accuse its predecessor of mishandling that very sector. The TAIEX is tumbling, salaries are stagnant, exports (even to China) are down and GDP growth has been sliced so often it might as well be salami.
The only thing that has gone up during that period is the cost of living, a trend that is about to be exacerbated by major hikes in energy prices.
As a responsible government that cares for the welfare of its people, the Ma administration has announced that the May 20 presidential inauguration ceremonies will cost no more than NT$6 million (US$200,000), 85 percent less than the cost of the inauguration in 2008 and 91 percent less than former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) inauguration in 2004. Among other things, a fireworks display and a party will be canceled, leaving pretty much just a banquet.
That is all well and good, but it hardly explains why, a little more than six months ago when every economist could already have told us the economy was not performing too well, the same government was willing to disburse NT$3.3 billion — or 550 times what it will spend next month — on celebrations for the Republic of China (ROC) centennial. Or why NT$215 million in taxpayers’ money, 36 times the cost of the inauguration, was spent on the Dreamers (夢想家) musical about the Xinhai Revolution and the establishment of the ROC.
Aside from the trimmed-down inauguration, another item that has faced severe cuts was the annual Han Kuang military exercises. Here again, to conserve money, the drills were toned down — so much so that no live ammunition was expended in the five days of exercises.
One wonders if it is purely coincidental that cuts in government spending only seem to affect the very symbols of nationhood and sovereignty, from national defense to celebrations of the democratic process, that gave Ma a second term in office.
Undoubtedly, governments should refrain from splurging when their nation is in dire financial straits. However, this should not happen at the expense of national pride. Taiwanese, regardless of whether they voted for Ma on Jan. 14, have a right to be proud of their democracy, which is what May 20 is all about. How do ordinary Taiwanese benefit if the celebrations are confined to an inaccessible banquet at the Grand Hotel?
Nearly 600 dignitaries, from heads of state to various representatives, will gather on that day to usher Ma into his second term. They, too, should be able to sense that Taiwan is a proud nation, not one that constantly does everything in its power to keep a low profile so as not to anger the giant next door.
Taiwanese and everybody else who cherishes democratic ideals deserve fireworks and a party on May 20, one that is worthy of the occasion.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS