Since the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, finished in August, the disputes which emerged during the event have continued to fester. Endless controversies have dominated local media’s coverage of the Games — even overshadowing weightlifter Hsu Shu-ching’s (許淑淨) gold medal — as numerous questions remain.
Why did tennis pro Hsieh Su-wei (謝淑薇) quit the Olympic team? Why is her father still taking every opportunity to denounce the Chinese Taipei Tennis Association? What did badminton player Tai Tzu-ying (戴資穎) do to deserve a fine from the Chinese Taipei Badminton Association?
On the other hand, the “Chinese Taipei” flag, which contains the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) emblem, and the “Chinese Taipei” title, which is a misrepresentation of Taiwan, have also come under scrutiny this year.
However, people tend to forget that the nation is forced to compete under that name because late president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) followed his father’s view that “gentlemen do not stand together with bandits” and refused to participate in the 1976 Montreal Olympics under the name Formosa when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the Canadian government proposed that title instead of the Republic of China (ROC).
Many people have expressed their opinions in response to these controversies. Notably, many have urged the government to take a more active role in managing sports and take measures to control single-sport organizations in order to prevent corruption and other irregularities.
Critics have also called on the government to establish clearer sports policies, citing the South Korean and Chinese systems as possible models. This suggestion is particularly popular among those who work in sports.
Meanwhile, media reports describing former national team athletes who have fallen into poverty have further intensified public outcry over the government’s lack of support for sports.
While it is true that the government must take on greater responsibility for the development of sports in Taiwan, it is important to first clarify what that responsibility should be. If that role is not clearly defined, it could be disastrous. What constitutes an appropriate role and firm implementation is something that the government must first make clear: This is not only about the state, it is also about what kind of nation everyone wants.
The German federal government stated in a report on that nation’s sports that it agrees that sports should be free from government intervention and control in order to maintain their autonomy and that the government should continuously provide the necessary framework and other conditions to allow sports to develop independently.
The report also stated that the German government should provide support for top-level sports and sports at the federal level, as clearly stipulated in the German constitution. The goal is to ensure that its top athletes are given equal opportunities to succeed in international sporting events.
Sports do not belong to the state and neither does a national team. Sports belong to the public. This does not mean that governments should not have sports policies. On the contrary, it is important that governments take an active role in sports, but they must take the correct measures at the right pace. That is key for any government’s sports policy to succeed.
Lin Chia-ho is an associate professor at National Chengchi University’s College of Law and a member of the Taipei Society.
Translated by Tu Yu-an
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs