Pioneer or sinner?
Kharis Templeman, project manager of the Taiwan Democracy and Security Project, which is part of the US-Asia Security Initiative, and a social science researcher at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University, presented a speech on Nov. 30 at Encina Hall titled: “The 2018 Taiwanese local elections: Results and Implications.”
He pointed out that the low approval rating of President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was a key factor in the election results and implied that Tsai’s re-election process looks shaky. She will probably face an intra-party challenge for the 2020 nomination, and she might use electoral incentives to rally her support base or pivot toward the independence issue.
On Dec. 9, attorney Huang Di-ying (黃帝穎) presented a speech titled: “Transform Justice, Judicial Reform and 2018 Election” to San Francisco Bay Area Taiwanese at the Formosan United Methodist Church in San Leandro.
He said that after the election, the Taipei High Administrative Court decided to unfreeze about NT$38.5 billion (US$1.25 billion) in assets belonging to the National Women’s League. It was a big slap in the face of the Ill-gotten Party Assets Settlement Committee. The decision greatly damaged fair competition among political parties and the nation’s transitional justice project.
Yes, there were tons of reviews and discussions in Taiwanese communities around the world expressing criticism, disappointment and frustration at the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) defeats on Nov. 24 in Taiwan’s local nine-in-one elections — mainly caused by the DPP’s poor administrative performance.
Surprisingly, no one mentioned cyberattacks or the impact of vote-buying and underground gambling operations. It seemed that fake news and outside network attacks did not matter to this election. At least in Taiwan people should know the importance of cybersecurity, and how to prevent and avoid attacks.
China’s 50 Cent Party began in 1996, when a local Chinese government official hired Internet commentators to find topics discussed on the Internet and input fake news to manipulate those topics.
It developed from professional Internet commentators to school officials hiring students as part-time Web commentators; from the publicity department in Changsha to Shanghai Normal University to the Chinese Communist Party’s Central Committee and to the General Office of the Chinese State Council. Now it is well-known around the world as the 50 Cent Army.
This army can easily promote any obedient politician from a civilian amateur to a member of the political elite, such as Ko wen-je (柯文哲) in Taipei or Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) in Kaohsiung.
Taiwan adopted China’s old traditional examination system to hire government employees, which is different to the US hiring academics who present opinions and beliefs to the government before adopting policies.
The examination system takes a long time, as employees must be trained to fit a job, while academics need to keep themselves up to date all the time otherwise they will be replaced.
This is an electronic era. A government must act rapidly when facing any challenge. Unfortunately, the DPP government seems not to know how to face this challenge.
Tsai adopted old KMT personnel to run her government; she amazingly turned the KMT’s political burden into the DPP’s crisis with the Mega International Commercial Bank scandal; and she insisted on maintaining the “status quo” of “Chinese Taipei” and suppressed the referendum for Taiwanese athletes to be compete under the name “Taiwan” for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.
If she keeps insisting on “Chinese Taipei with Chinese values,” then people would rather vote for the KMT. Why do voters need the DPP? If she admits to representing a “Taiwan with Taiwanese values,” she must accept the “one China” policy where Taiwan is not part of China — not the “one China” principle where Taiwan is part of China.
It is ridiculous that a lot of young voters mistook the so-called “1992 consensus” as the “one China” policy. Remember, in 1992 there was a meeting in Hong Kong between the Straits Exchange Foundation, the semi-official representative of the Republic of China (ROC), and the Association for Relations across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS), the semi-representative of the People’s Republic of China, but no consensus was reached. It is a fake political term fabricated by KMT politician Su Chi (蘇起) in 2000.
The year 2020 will be critical for the future of Taiwan. If Tsai is to run for president on behalf of Taiwanese, she must clearly commit to “Taiwan first” and not “Chinese Taipei.” She must be fully aware of her own weakness regarding personnel.
Please be responsible for party politics. Please appoint the right person to do the right thing at the right time and get it done right.
Please clearly identify that you are running for president of Taiwan, not ROC-China. Taiwan cannot afford falling to Chinese occupation. Taiwan is not part of China. China simply does not own the sovereignty of Taiwan.
What a shame about the lousy meeting she had with Ko on Dec. 13. Is Tsai still a president? Is she unconsciously incompetent or unconsciously competent? Time is running short and the 2020 presidential election will come soon.
Tsai could be remarkably labeled as the founding pioneer of a Taiwanese nation or a sinner carrying infamy forever.
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers