How serious are the nation’s sports bodies about reform? An example involving the Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee (CTOC) says it all: Former Executive Yuan spokesman Sun Lih-chyun (孫立群) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has confirmed that he will assume the post of secretary-general of the committee in November. Acknowledging that his expertise lies in cross-strait and administrative affairs, and that he is unfamiliar with the sports sector, Sun said he would try his best to learn on the job, adding that he has been watching sports events with former Sports Administration director-general Ho Jow-fei (何卓飛).
This arrangement instantly prompts the question: How is someone whose entire working experience never involved sports qualified to lead a national sports organization?
Sun’s stance on sports affairs has left many shaking their heads and making pessimistic predictions.
On the issue of the referendum campaign calling for the nation to compete as “Taiwan” rather than “Chinese Taipei” at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and other international sports events and China’s interference with the East Asian Olympic Committee that resulted in the latter revoking Taichung’s right to host the East Asian Youth Games next year, Sun has no harsh words for China.
Aside from failing to chide Beijing for its involvement in the East Asian Olympic Committee’s decision, Sun also stigmatized civil groups’ efforts to get rid of the demeaning appellation of “Chinese Taipei” by stating: “I will try to minimize the influence of political elements as much as possible so that Taiwanese athletes’ right to compete at international competitions can be ensured and not jeopardized.”
Truly pathetic.
Who needs an aggressor like China that incessantly schemes to squeeze Taiwan off the world sports stage when Taiwan has people such as Sun who willingly give up on the fight to demand respect for Taiwanese athletes who bring honor to the nation?
However absurd this appointment is, it is not that surprising given the history of the governing bodies of the nation’s sports associations.
The management of the CTOC — as is the case with other sports associations — is not appointed by the government, but elected by executive committee members. In the case of the CTOC secretary-general, the candidate is first nominated by the CTOC chairman before its executive committee members vote on the nomination.
A glance at the executive committee shows that it is comprised largely of KMT members, such as Taipei mayoral candidate Ting Shou-chung (丁守中) and former legislator Huang Chih-hsiung (黃志雄).
In other words, although the KMT is no longer the ruling party, most of the nation’s sports associations are still under its control and any move on the part of the government to reform the associations would be branded political interference.
Another example is the Chinese Taipei Football Association: As part of the government’s reforms to attempt to eliminate nepotism, and demand transparency and accountability, the Legislative Yuan on Aug. 31 last year passed amendments to the National Sports Act (國民體育法) that allow members of the public to join sports associations and vote for their leaders.
The change was instantly met with opposition from a number of sports associations, with the soccer body filing a complaint with FIFA alleging that the amended law contravened FIFA regulations, as those in power within the soccer body looked to defend their interests under the guise of “no political interference.”
So when exactly can sports associations be freed from the shackles of lingering party-state control?
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the