To demonstrate their determination to curb crime and eradicate "black gold," Minister of Interior Yu Cheng-hsien (
It is interesting just how very specific these targets were. Yu proposed to accomplish "zero growth in the crime rate" within three months; Chen proposed to prosecute at least 50 corruption cases, conduct 10,000 searches and prosecute 1,000 drug-use cases within three months. If these goals are not reached, both vowed to make themselves accountable and resign.
This brings to memory Lin Yang-kang's (林洋港) boasting during his term as minister of the interior. He promised he would bring an end to the metal cages people put on their windows for safety. His statement made him the laughing stock of the nation.
The crime rate consistently has been a key issue for Taiwanese voters. Therefore, public pressure is elevated when it comes to crime control.
Is there a crime problem in Taiwan? The answer differs, depending on whether crime statistics or public perception are used as the criteria. Sometimes statistics released by the government are very impressive, but the public may still feel uneasy. To the government, rating the crime problem is based on the fluctuation of objective statistics. To the people, it is based on a subjective sense of security that is influenced by the crime stories they see in the media.
When Chen Chin-hsing (陳進興) was a fugitive, he committed crimes at will and wherever he pleased, creating a great sense of helplessness. Although the government tried to prove -- based on statistics -- that there was no worsening of crime problem, Lien Chan (連戰) still had to resign as premier due to public pressure.
Here are a things Yu and Chen may wish to consider:
First, crime-fighting requires good management skills, rather than hot-headedness that can lead to taking action blindly. It needs to be done regularly and systematically. It is not a three-month endeavor, but a measured application of pressure. Obviously, crime can never be completely eradicated, but it can be controlled to a certain degree.
Second, statistics can be deceiving. It is the duty of law-enforcement agencies to fight crime. But setting specific arrest targets and having three-month crackdowns can only push them to deliberately stall ongoing investigations until it is time to show progress. To meet targets, they can just decrease the number of cases they cover up.
Third, crime control should not be used as an election-year vote-getter. After all, it would make policy implementation unnecessarily complicated for police on the streets. Once the opposition parties join the circus, then another boxing match between the opposition and the ruling camp ensues.
If the crime rate of Taiwan can be curbed within a short period time, that would be good. But the focus of crime-fighting should still be strategies and procedure implementation. The Cabinet need not take credit for dips in the crime rate, because the fight against crime is a never-ending war, rather than a short-term crackdown. As long as serious and long-term efforts are made, the people will naturally begin to sense gradual improvement.
Finally, recall that relying on law enforcement to fight crimes is only dealing with the symptoms. To heal the illness, improvements in people's lives and education level are still the best way to long-term health.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS