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.
In a Facebook post on Wednesday last week, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City Councilor Hsu Chiao-hsin (徐巧芯) wrote: “The KMT must fall for Taiwan to improve.’ Allow me to ask the question again: Is this really true?” It matters not how many times Hsu asks the question, my answer will always be the same: “Yes, the KMT must be toppled for Taiwan to improve.” In the lengthy Facebook post, titled “What were those born in the 1980s guilty of?” Hsu harked back to the idealistic aspirations of the 2014 Sunflower movement before heaping opprobrium on the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP)
The scuffle between Chinese embassy staffers in Fiji and a Taiwanese diplomat at a Republic of China (ROC) Double Ten National Day celebration has turned into a public relations opportunity for the government, Beijing and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Although the incident occurred on Oct. 8, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) downplayed it, only for the story to be picked up by the foreign media, forcing the ministry to respond. The public and opposition parties asked why the government had failed to remonstrate more strongly in the first instance. It is still unclear whether the ministry missed a trick
US President Donald Trump and his Democratic rival, former US vice president Joe Biden, are holding their final debate tonight. In their foreign policy debate, China is sure to be a major issue of contention for the two candidates. Here are several questions the moderator should pose to the candidates: For both: In the first televised US presidential debates in 1960, then-Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy and his Republican counterpart, Richard Nixon, were asked whether the US should intervene if communist China attacked Taiwan’s outlying islands of Kinmen and Matsu. Kennedy said no, unless the main island of Taiwan was also attacked.
For most of us, the colorful, otherworldly marinescapes of coral reefs are as remote as the alien landscapes of the moon. We rarely, if ever, experience these underwater wonderlands for ourselves — we are, after all, air-breathing, terrestrial creatures mostly cocooned in cities. It is easy not to notice the perilous state they are in: We have lost 50 percent of coral reefs in the past 20 years and more than 90 percent are expected to die by 2050, a presentation at the Ocean Sciences Meeting in San Diego, California, earlier this year showed. As the oceans heat further and