Taiwan has been shaken by a high-profile corruption case revolving around a NT$16 million (US$530,000) bribe allegedly paid to former Taoyuan County deputy commissioner Yeh Shih-wen (葉世文) in connection with a public housing construction project. Yeh was dismissed when the news broke and as that case developed, it came to light that a law professor apparently thought he could save about NT$1,000 by using a cheaper, short-distance ticket on a high-speed train from Taipei to Zuoying (左營) in Greater Kaohsiung.
The money involved in the latter case is less than in the first by a factor of 10,000, but people can be greedy, whether they stand to gain NT$1,000 or NT$10 million. What can be done to discourage greed and stamp out corruption? Two areas that need changing are education and the way government officials are selected.
An education system that emphasizes competition and comparison will produce people who are always trying to get ahead. The attitude such a system fosters is that if someone else has a BMW, then you will want a Porsche and if another person lives in a high-rise apartment then you want to live luxury home. If people cannot maintain face by getting the things they want, they will think of ways to get their hands on more money and corruption is one method of obtaining that.
Many people judge whether a junior-high school is well-run based on how many of its students achieve the grades necessary to get into prestigious senior-high schools like Taipei Municipal Jianguo High School and Taipei First Girls’ High School. The same criteria are used for assessing how well a senior-high school is run — how many of its alumni get into National Taiwan University. The national education system gives pride of place to competition and comparison.
If graduating students knows all 26 letters of the English alphabet and can understand basic English, solve simple mathematical problems and comprehend newspaper editorials; if they are courteous and sociable, then that institution’s teaching should be regarded as successful, no matter how many of its graduates go on to attend the top schools.
An education system that emphasizes improving basic skills instead of how many star students a school can produce, might produce a more harmonious and civil society, as well as make it harder for corruption to take root.
Another major problem lies with the government, where being well-connected is the key factor in selecting administrative officers. The bribery case involving former Executive Yuan secretary-general Lin Yi-shih (林益世), incidences of corruption in Changhua and Nantou counties, the scandal-plagued Taipei Twin Towers project and the case involving Yeh — all of these were borne out of problems that arouse with officials who had connections in high places.
Although President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) talks about the need for clean government, there is clearly a problem with the system for appointing officials. As long as this system remains in place, nothing that Ma tries to do from the top down can stop the rot that is going on beneath him.
If instead of their capacity to follow whatever senior political figure they are related to, incorruptibility was the top requirement for all government officials — from the premier and Cabinet ministers, to mayors and county commissioners — with ability as the second requirement and good character the third, it would make the entire government cleaner and more efficient.
However, picking the right people is not easy. Even presidents cannot avoid picking officials from among their close associates. Evidently, it is hard to trust people that one does not know. However, if officials were selected using these three requirements, it would reduce the occurrence of corruption.
Education can change people’s attitudes from and the government can do its part by not appointing people of dubious character to official posts.
Finally, the government must ensure that it employs lawful and methods to achieve its aims.
As French writer Georges Bernanos said: “The first sign of corruption in a society that is still alive is that the end justifies the means.”
The government would do well to heed this axiom.
Chang Ruay-shiung is president of the National Taipei College of Business.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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