The legislative session that opened last week is expected to debate bills concerning pension reform and marriage equality — issues that have stirred raucous debates and repeatedly brought protesters onto the streets.
The government has exhibited differing degrees of resolve toward pushing its ideas through on the two issues; but it should remember that with both, what has been promised for the betterment of the nation cannot and should not be thrown off course by small groups of people who threaten to use extreme means to forward their own interests out of purported concerns for public welfare.
A group of veterans of the Chinese Civil War, the so-called “800 heroes,” on Tuesday walked around the perimeter of the Legislative Yuan carrying Republic of China (ROC) flags to protest the government’s pension reform plans.
They said that the reforms should be scrapped, even though pensions for military personnel are not even addressed in the bill.
Those leading the march claimed to have staged the protest in the interests of military veterans, but shouts were heard of: “Safeguard the ROC and oppose Taiwanese independence,” with retired army lieutenant general Wu Sz-huai (吳斯懷) at one point condemning the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government as not worthy of representing the ROC flag and the ROC.
The obscure motivation of the protest was similarly embodied in an association of retired public servants gathering last week in which a retired official called on the civil service to “drag down the [DPP] government.”
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) politicians have fervently thrown their weight behind these events, while at the same time telling the public that they are not against pension reforms — which they deem necessary — just against the current proposals. However, they are not offering any alternatives.
The government has shown resolve over its plans to make the pension systems more sustainable; as President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) repeatedly stated, reforms do not come without short-term discomfort. The voices of those against the reforms are concentrated, loud and sensational, but legitimacy is not conferred from high-pitched protests alone.
In the same way, those opposed to marriage equality who compared gays to cockroaches did nothing for the validity of their arguments.
The president has also called for “conversation” between groups that oppose same-sex marriage and those that support it, as if the root of their differences lies in a simple, logical misunderstanding.
“Family values and marriage equality do not necessarily have to contradict each other,” Tsai said.
She is right, as the historic ruling of the US Supreme Court on same-sex marriage used traditional family values as the rationale of its ruling.
“Marriage is a keystone of our social order,” it said.
However, what Tsai should beware of is the falsity of those who oppose reform by asserting that they speak for public welfare; in this case, traditional “moral values” and the protection of children.
The groups opposing marriage equality have been spreading false information and fabricated materials. They tell people who do not share their religious beliefs — and actually could not care less about the marriage equality bill, let alone oppose it — that the bill would threaten their way of life and their children’s education has been “contaminated” with sexually explicit textbooks.
The government should not call for “more communication” with those who are against marriage equality because “the Bible condemns it.”
Instead it should help people establish the truth about marriage equality and its consequences, and navigate a way through the maze of false arguments and unsubstantiated presumptions.
That assumes that the government is serious about marriage equality, and does not plan to stall the issue.
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