The serious difficulties facing Taiwan's economy means that various individuals and organizations will voice dissatisfaction with government policies. This is inevitable in a democratic country.
Reports about a demonstration in Taipei by about 100,000 farmers and fishermen this Saturday should not worry society. Nor should the planned protests cause the government to weaken appropriate reforms of the credit departments of farmers' and fishermen's associations. Policy flip-flops will only confuse matters and cause people to lose faith in the government's reform measures.
To be fair, executives at the farmers' and fishermen's credit co-operatives are responsible for most of the financial difficulties facing the co-ops. These executives, in cooperation with opposition politicians, have fanned the flames of anger for the farmers and fishermen, whose livelihoods have long been facing difficulties. They have painted the government's plan to manage the failing co-ops as an attempt to "annihilate" them.
They have forced the government to make a major policy U-turn by suspending implementation of the reforms. This will allow the co-op executives, who have long preyed on ordinary rural citizens, to carry on with their financial misdeeds. The consequences of this will be endless and farmers and fishermen will find it even more difficult to improve their livelihoods.
The farmers' and fishermen's associations have long been controlled by the KMT and have long since evolved into political platforms for local gangsters. In every election, the KMT has engaged in vote-buying through these organizations.
In addition, local factions have often treated the credit co-ops like their own personal coffers. Illegal and non-performing loans have been serious and prevalent problems at the co-ops. Many of them are facing collapse due to widespread embezzlement.
In short, the credit co-ops are a time bomb waiting to blow up Taiwan's financial sector. There can be absolutely no excuse for the government to avoid reforming these corrupt institutions.
Former president Lee Teng-hui's (李登輝) idea of merging these co-ops into a large-scale agricultural bank is a good suggestion. Only then can the interests of Taiwan's farmers and fishermen be guaranteed under a healthy financial institution.
Agricultural affairs should be separated from financial affairs. Financial experts should be brought in to watch over the purses of farmers and fishermen. Revenues generated therein should be used for expanding distribution networks for agricultural produce and for other agricultural measures.
Everyone knows that the farmers' and fishermen's associations have arrived at a stage where reforms are inevitable. But the pan-blue camp has tried to use the two groups as tools for political wrangling. They have fomented their anger in an attempt to block the government's reform efforts.
This is a repeat of the uproar over the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant. The opposition camp has won face, but the entire citizenry will have to pay dearly for it.
The postponement of reforms will only aggravate the financial hemorrhage at the co-ops. If a bank run breaks out, the government will have to clean up the mess and take care of all the bad loans and bad assets. Meanwhile, those who have so abused and pillaged the co-ops will get away scot free.
The government cannot afford to forget its mission of bringing Taiwan into a new era. It should show some guts and demonstrate that it is not afraid of losing political power. It should stop acting like the KMT government, making people wonder where Taiwan's future lies.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS