Last week, Academia Sinica held its biennial convocation of academicians in Taipei. The gathering of the distinguished academics in diverse fields garnered a great deal of media attention not only because of the election of new members, but also due to the academicians’ criticisms of a variety of issues in Taiwan, including increasing unfairness and injustice.
Apparently, recent developments in Taiwanese society and the economy have aroused some academicians’ fury and at least one of the institute’s members, Cyrus Chu (朱敬一), was so upset that he said one needs to view tax reforms as a form of social movement to make it work in Taiwan, while criticizing the government’s action to attract Taiwanese capital back from overseas — which turned out to be a force pushing up housing prices — a stupid and illogical policy.
The convocation was held more than three months after the student-led Sunflower movement, which protested the government’s lack of transparency in policymaking in general and its handling of the cross-strait service trade agreement in particular. The spirit of the movement was clearly reflected in Academia Sinica President Wong Chi-huey’s (翁啟惠) opening speech on Tuesday, in which he reminded his fellow members that their responsibility to society, in addition to their research, is to speak up for the people, with a passion to help enhance social justice and fairness.
That is why we heard some academicians agreeing that the public’s support of the Sunflower movement was a reflection of its great disappointment in the government, while the dispute over the service trade pact was a spark that ignited its anger. It is no wonder that we also learned from some academics that an unfair tax system does lead to growing social and economic inequality in the nation, while others said that the outcome of educational reforms over the last 20 years was an absolute mess, period.
Overall, academics have a growing sense of dissatisfaction with the government in terms of housing affordability, class stratification, wage stagnation, income inequality and higher education policy. The question is: What can they do to help the government fix those problems, apart from drafting policy suggestions?
The involvement of Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), a researcher at the institute, in the Sunflower movement in March raised the eyebrows of some Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, who raised the question of political neutrality. Since Academia Sinica is under the jurisdiction of the Presidential Office, should its researchers maintain political neutrality, as civil servants are supposed to do?
Wong asked Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) these questions during the latter’s visit to the institute. Jiang answered that he, who once served as a researcher at the institute, never considered himself a civil servant during his tenure there. In other words, according to our understanding of Jiang’s remark, when it comes to criticizing disputable government policies, political neutrality is not required of the institute’s researchers, because they are not part of the civil service system.
Members and researchers at Academia Sinica are influential intelligentsia in terms of their knowledge and expertise. However, they also win people’s respect because they are viewed as intellectuals of social conscience. In the past, they gave the impression of conducting their research in an ivory tower, with their lives mostly isolated from the public.
The situation has changed in recent years, with more academics and researchers willing to participate in political and social movements. We appreciate their intention to prove themselves — and the nation — capable of contributing to national affairs. However, the more we look at this development, the more we are left wondering: Does the government need to fail doing its job so badly that even intellectuals are revolting?
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry