As a former governor of Alaska (2002 to 2006) and also having served for 22 years in the US Senate, I have a strong interest in US relations with East Asia. Within that context, Taiwan is a place close to my heart, because I personally got to know the two men who pushed Taiwan in the direction of democracy, former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
Since that time, Taiwan has gone through some more cycles of change of government, which is an inherent part of a democratic system.
Indeed, in January, I headed the observer mission of the International Committee for Fair Elections in Taiwan (ICFET), an international group of 19 academics from eight countries.
Our report on our findings is scheduled to come out in the next few weeks and I can already say that our conclusion is that the elections were mostly free, but only partly fair. You can read more details when the report comes out.
However, my comments here are not about the elections, but about the overall direction of the country.
It is undoubtedly clear that Taiwan lives in the shadow of an aggressive neighbor, but it should not allow that to determine its future as a free and democratic nation.
Taiwanese have worked long and hard for their democracy, and they need to continue to work hard to preserve and nurture their freedom and liberty. This work needs to be done internally, when they assess the functioning of the system of checks and balances — the legislature needs to be a stronghold of democracy where people with vision look after the longer-term interests of their constituents.
Freedom and liberty also need to be nurtured in the judicial system.
Many observers say that the judiciary is still strongly influenced by the politics of the ruling party and that there is a strong need for judicial reform. The legal community needs to champion the democratic process in Taiwan.
This brings me to a very specific issue of injustice — the way Chen is being treated. I am not discussing whether he was or was not guilty — although a number of international observers, such as Jerome Cohen, question whether he received a fair trial.
I am specifically focusing on his need for adequate medical treatment and the conditions under which he is being detained.
Most recently, on May 23, Chen was allowed to go to Cheng Kung Memorial Hospital for only six hours. Doctors said that they would need much more time to treat him adequately and that the six-hour time span had been a “political condition” imposed by the authorities.
The right thing to do would be for the authorities to release him on medical parole.
The second aspect is the conditions under which he is being detained — a small cell, with no bed, chair or desk.
If he wants to write, he has to lie down on the floor. Such treatment is unconscionable and reminiscent of the Soviet Union more than 45 years ago, not Taiwan in 2012.
The least that needs to be done is to give him an adequate cell, with a chair, desk and regular bed. Like other prisoners, he should be allowed to work outside his cell in the daytime, engaging in some physical activity. Finally, he should have full access to his lawyer and comprehensive medical care.
Dealing with controversial issues like this is not easy, but a fair and humanitarian resolution is essential if Taiwan wants to be considered a full democracy, worthy of international respect.
Frank Murkowski is a former governor of Alaska and a US senator.
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
RSS