Last month, a National Taiwan University (NTU) student was allegedly involved in the vandalization of a statue at National Chengchi University (NCCU). After six days, the university administration broke its silence, pointedly picking Feb. 28 to issue a statement accusing the student of violent behavior and intensifying social division, and, in a rare move, saying that the incident would be handled according to university regulations.
The NTU administration’s statement is chilling because of the date and because it shows an utter inability to understand political statements. If the incident is handled according to its regulations, then how does the university intend to handle NTU president Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔), whom the Judicial Yuan has voted to impeach, or the 68 professors who illegally took side jobs?
The student’s actions at NCCU were a political statement. Should this kind of action also be treated as destruction of public property as specified in NTU’s regulations?
Furthermore, Article 5 of the Act on Promoting Transitional Justice (促進轉型正義條例) states that “symbols appearing in public buildings or places that commemorate or express nostalgia for authoritarian rulers shall be removed, renamed, or dealt with in some other way.”
Statues that show nostalgia for authoritarian rulers still have not been removed or had their names changed as school administrations ignore the law and instead call student actions extreme.
Do they really think that it is extreme to demand that the law be followed?
The accusations of violence and intensified social division by NTU are even more unacceptable. What really intensifies social division is people who are unwilling to understand history and who worship authoritarian symbols.
NTU, a hall of learning, does not even have a rudimentary understanding of transitional justice. On Feb. 28, NTU students spontaneously organized a forum on the April 6 Incident to discuss the history of state violence and the White Terror era and, on the very same day, the NTU chose to condemn a student.
That the NTU administration displays such a lack of awareness of history and such ignorance of the importance of the date is a source of endless distress.
If NTU really does have such high standards of “legal conscience,” and if it really does care about social division and its educational responsibilities, should it not set a good example by explaining to students why its president can remain silent, despite earning millions of New Taiwan dollars from side jobs and despite the Judicial Yuan voting to impeach him?
Should it not explain why academic papers that are possibly the result of ethics violations are not investigated, but instead passed off as “informal papers” to allay public doubt? Then there are the 68 professors who illegally took side jobs, almost entirely without punishment.
What have these incidents taught students?
The controversy over Kuan has been going on for almost a year, resulting in turmoil and division. To this day, the institute has not displayed the slightest intent to reform. Instead it made a big deal over issuing a statement on Feb. 28 so that its new president could crack his whip and bring out school regulations to address a political controversy.
Here is a piece of advice Kuan should consider carefully: Start by doing what is right instead of punishing students while allowing your staff to get away with worse.
Mo Yen is a graduate student at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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