Every society, democracy or dictatorship, has the capacity for justice or injustice. When justice stands proud and injustice lowers its head, society progresses. When justice goes to ground and injustice becomes emboldened, then society regresses.
Politicians, the press, powerful figures, higher learning institutions and pressure groups shape social discourse and direction. Whether they choose to stand for progressive or backward-looking ideas, for reform or obstruction, is crucial for a society to progress or regress.
Taiwan now stands at a crossroads.
On the one side, we have groups like the Youth Alliance Against Media Monsters, which stands for freedom of speech and against media monopolization. Many other students have also become involved in several high-profile cases — including forced land expropriations in Dapu Township (大浦), evictions to make way for the Wenlin Yuan urban renewal project and the labor dispute at Hualon Corp. They stand for justice for residents, land owners and workers, and do not have vested interests in any of these causes.
On the other side, we have people like Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), who recently said: “Students are not legislators, of course they cannot question government officials.” This was the same person who, when she was a legislator, lambasted a Ministry of Education official, saying: “What kind of Ministry of Education is this?” and “Resign! Resign! Shut up!” and subsequently telling the press that the nation has a useless education ministry.
For Hung, it is okay for a legislator to embarrass a government official, but not for a member of the public to criticize a public servant. What does Hung stand for?
When students protested outside the ministry last week, Minister of Education Chiang Wei-ling (蔣偉寧) showed how much he cared for the students by sending out the riot police, and then asking universities to find out more about students who attended the protest and “show them concern.” This is happening today in a democratic nation that thinks martial law and political suppression have been consigned to history. What does Chiang stand for?
National Tsing Hua University student Chen Wei-ting (陳為廷), a co-convener of the Youth Alliance Against Media Monsters, was criticized for failing to show due respect to his elders in the way he spoke to Chiang at the legislature’s Education and Culture Committee meeting on Monday last week. What Chen was showing was the spirit of “I love my teachers, but I love the truth more.” However, the press branded him as “ill-mannered.”
Compare that with four years ago, when President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) referred to visiting Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) by his proper title, “chairman,” but all Chen could muster was a “mister” in return. The same press did not call the ARATS chairman “ill-mannered.” What does the press stand for?
Then there was Tsing Hua University itself, which chose to believe an alarmist report in the Chinese-language United Daily News and rushed out an apology to Chiang and the public without bothering to check the facts, only to hurriedly retract its statement after many people protested. The university presided over a farce caused by its lack of scientific spirit or due caution in checking facts. What does the university stand for?
Would Taiwan fare better under the principles demonstrated by Chen and his friends, or under those of the press, Hung, Chiang and Tsing Hua University?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with