A few weeks before the start of the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, a dispute broke out between Taiwanese tennis player Hsieh Su-wei (謝淑薇) and the Chinese Taipei Tennis Association. Hsieh later caused an uproar when she announced on the eve of the Games that she was dropping out of both the Games and the nation’s Olympic delegation. The controversy mostly lay in her remarks that she is a professional athlete and that her career was not built on government funding. She also said that she only plays for her fans.
As Hsieh said, every top athlete relies on the support of their fans. Games are exciting to watch because of the fluid motion of the athletes and the highly competitive nature of the sport. No matter what the predictions are before a game, people never know what the result will be until the very end. The tension is high, anything can happen and the competitors are on tenterhooks all the way to the last ball.
Let us put aside the question of who is right or wrong in Hsieh’s case. The cultivation of an outstanding athlete is paid for by blood, sweat, tears and money. Every nation has its own system and approach for nurturing athletes.
Take the more advanced nations, such as the US and some European nations, for example. Unlike the government in Taiwan, they do not put in huge administrative resources and funds to cultivate athletes even when they are at the beginner’s level. Nor do they fund them to compete overseas so they can gain experience and to raise their international profiles.
The goal of providing such abundant administrative resources to athletes cannot be only measured in awards and metrics, which is what the public mostly sees. It is also about the educational benefits of the support. The government provides as much as it can, without asking for anything in return. The purpose is to help athletes reach their peak and achieve the highest possible returns when the time, place and conditions are right.
This is often lost on athletes in Taiwan. As they develop and become professional, they might become internationally renowned and prize money starts pouring in. And when they have built a name for themselves, they then start to demand that sports associations and the government provide greater resources, and state-run businesses do more for them.
Some might even withdraw from important international competitions, such as the Olympic Games or the Asian Games, to make their point. Long-term sports educators find this situation regrettable.
Success and recognition reveal much about an athlete’s character. Some athletes are full of gratitude and repay kindness with kindness, trying to give back to the government and society while helping with sports development at the grassroots level. Others frequently complain about government agencies, criticizing state-run enterprises, coaches and schools, firing back at those who made every effort to promote them.
As the saying goes: “People eat the same rice, but differ in thought and character.”
Many athletes are aware of how fortunate they are and value the opportunities they have been given. However, others are greedy and expect too much, demanding special treatment from schools and employers, more government funding and exclusive training sites.
These athletes think they deserve special treatment for performing better than others, demanding high grades from teachers while skipping classes so they can attend training and competitions. More absurdly, some do not even know what courses they are taking, who their teachers are and what their assignments are.
When athletes care so little about their own education, how can they possibly develop a sense of responsibility required in competition or in their personal lives?
Elite athletes with a professional attitude and good character are aware which side of their bread is buttered, and to whom they owe their success. They do not to turn their backs on those who helped them get where they are today.
I have been an athlete. I am now a sports educator. I have seen the situation from both sides of the fence. I used to think that the government provides funding for no other reason than for us to perform well, so that Taiwan could enjoy a higher international profile in the world of sports.
Now I know that the resources the government and state-run enterprises pour into sports funding is more about education and investment for the future. This is about cultivating character in sports competitors, for the betterment of society as a whole.
Great athletes should know humility, because their success is a product of the efforts of many people.
Chou Chien-chih is a professor in the Graduate Institute of Sport Pedagogy at the University of Taipei.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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