Just as the national Economic Development Advisory Conference was beginning to have an impact on the current political situation, Vice President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) bluntly criticized its consensus on cross-strait economic and trade policy. A short time later, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) lashed out at the environmental impact assessment process while touring a factory.
The blunders that the nation's two top leaders have made with their outspoken criticism have further damaged the government's image. Disturbingly, their comments were not mere slips of the tongue, but rather are related to their attitudes and policy stances, indicating the damage might therefore be more serious than the surface wounds suggest.
When economic alarm bells rang after Chen took office last year, he came up with a policy of giving priority to economic development and postponing social welfare programs. When the economy rapidly worsened, Chen announced that the government would make an all-out effort to salvage it.
With the economic slowdown as a backdrop, it is understandable that the authorities concerned should work hard to solve our economic problems. But if the government -- for the sake of the economy -- sacrifices environmental protection, social welfare and even social justice, people will simply become all the more disillusioned with the DPP government.
The public can understand that the vice president serves as a spokeswoman for specific policies or stances. The public would also be inclined to show respect when the vice president puts forward her views on policy.
But Lu usually fails to act with propriety and thus triggers disputes. She not only hurts others and the government, but also herself. Often, Lu seems to forget that she is the vice president and freely criticizes the government. She has even said that everything she does and says follows her conscience, meaning that no one but she is right. She also said that those in power must have the courage to face history and their consciences. It's almost as though she is in an opposition party and is the only one with a conscience.
Indeed, Lu is perhaps most confused about whether she is in power or a member of the opposition. At the recent 2001 Global Peace Assembly, Lu, in her official status, insisted on playing a leading role in non-governmental activities and thus became the focus of criticism.
Lu has also promoted the formation of the National Union of Taiwanese Women (
In a diverse society during a democratic era, the president should transcend all specific interest groups and protect the rights and interests of all people. The DPP has long promoted social reforms and social justice and should not sacrifice everything for the sake of the economy.
Although she has no substantive power, the vice president can only win the public's respect by choosing her words wisely. More importantly, both the president and vice president must carefully manage their relations with the private sector. Although that sector and the government do not have to be antagonistic toward one another, the nation's top two leaders have to respect majority rights and interests at the grassroots level and should not interfere in NGOs.
Chiu Hei-yuan is a professor in the Department of Sociology at National Taiwan University. Translated by Jackie Lin
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS