In the past few days, National Taiwan University (NTU) has been rocked by a series of demonstrations purportedly in support of upholding the school’s autonomy. Those who support NTU president-elect Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔) have been holding gatherings on campus for some time.
On Saturday, former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) and other KMT heavyweights participated in one such demonstration.
Despite holding signs in support of university autonomy, they shouted slogans of support for their party and Ma. Even slogans opposing Taiwanese independence were heard on campus and several groups long opposed to pension reform have also turned up.
Were these activities really in support of academic autonomy, or was the school’s campus being used as a parade ground by the KMT?
A walk through the campus would reveal that the environment feels normal. Aside from a group of older-looking people, self-described parents of students or alumni who have installed themselves beside the campus bell, hardly any students are paying attention to these events.
That is not to say that students do not appreciate the importance of the university’s independence, nor do they underestimate the importance of the school’s president.
However, the main issue that needs to be clarified is which group forms the backbone of the university: Is it alumni and parents, or is it the lecturers and the students? If the politicians and protesters do not respect the true backbone of the university — its students — then what right do they have to speak about its autonomy?
Most unbearable was Ma’s presence on campus. The former KMT president went on campus supposedly to support the university’s ban on political interference, only to make vocal appeals for President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) not to interfere with the school’s autonomy.
Hung’s presence at the rally was even more absurd. During her tenure as KMT chairwoman, Hung established the Sun Yat-sen School, which has an office at NTU. Anyone who has heard Hung’s speeches and brand of politics would understand that the school is politicized and does not respect the university’s rules against political interference.
The only people seen at the demonstration were retired officials from the KMT era making eloquent speeches for politics to be driven out of the university. “We are clean, anyone who questions our motives must have a political axe to grind” — this seems to be the logic of the KMT.
KMT Chairman Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) has repeatedly called for a return of the KMT’s youth wing to university campuses. How can the party keep a straight face while calling for politics to be removed from NTU? The party’s Yi Hsien Student Association still operates on campus and holds book readings, but Ma and Hung did not call for it to be expelled from campus.
For the KMT, now out of office for nearly two years, the adjustment to the new reality must have been painful. Long used to being at the center of history, the party is now thrashing around for a role and a sense of purpose, which is why it came to campus to support “suppressed” students.
However, if the party wants to parade around on campus, it needs to choose the right issue. If it cares about university autonomy, it must start by caring about students. If all its politics are focused on the party, then it is not protecting the university’s independence, but instead is defending the interests of the party and the old party-state era.
Michael Lin is a postgraduate student at National Taiwan University’s Graduate Institute of National Development.
Translated by Edward Jones
With each passing day, the threat of a People’s Republic of China (PRC) assault on Taiwan grows. Whatever one’s view about the history, there is essentially no question that a PRC conquest of Taiwan would mark the end of the autonomy and freedom enjoyed by the island’s 23 million people. Simply put, the PRC threat to Taiwan is genuinely existential for a free, democratic and autonomous Taiwan. Yet one might not know it from looking at Taiwan. For an island facing a threat so acute, lethal and imminent, Taiwan is showing an alarming lack of urgency in dramatically strengthening its defenses.
As India’s six-week-long general election grinds past the halfway mark, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s messaging has shifted from confident to shrill. After the first couple of phases of polling showed a 3 percentage point drop in turnout, Modi and his party leaders have largely stopped promoting their accomplishments of the past 10 years — or, for that matter, the “Modi guarantees” offered in the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) manifesto for the next five. Instead, making the majority Hindu population fear and loathe Muslims seems to be the BJP’s preferred talking point. Modi went on the offensive in an April 21
The people of Taiwan recently received confirmation of the strength of American support for their security. Of four foreign aid bills that Congress passed and President Biden signed in April, the bill legislating additional support for Taiwan garnered the most votes. Three hundred eighty-five members of the House of Representatives voted to provide foreign military financing to Taiwan versus only 34 against. More members of Congress voted to support Taiwan than Ukraine, Israel, or banning TikTok. There was scant debate over whether the United States should provide greater support for Taiwan. It was understood and broadly accepted that doing so
I still remember the first time I heard about the possibility of an invasion by China. I was six years old. I thought war was coming and hid in my bed, scared. After 18 years, the invasion news tastes like a sandwich I eat every morning. As a Gen Z Taiwanese student who has witnessed China’s harassment for more than 20 years, I want to share my opinion on China. Every generation goes through different events. I have seen not only the norms of China’s constant presence, but also the Sunflower movement, wars and people fighting over peace or equality,