With charges of dirty tricks flying between the pan-green and pan-blue camps and allegations rolling out from business circles in the midst of the election campaign, the public has gradually been made aware of the relationship between politics and business. What they have seen might be just the tip of the iceberg.
Given today's campaign methods, an enormous amount of money must be spent on TV commercials, print propaganda mobilizing supporters to attend campaign rallies, broadcasting campaign activities and setting up campaign headquarters. The cost is probably much higher than each camp has admitted.
Recently exposed allegations and scandals involve hundreds of millions of NT dollars. Two scenarios are running at the same time now -- "business acquiring government" and "politics controlling business."
If this happened in the US, what would the result be? The answer is that it would not happen. This does not mean US politicians are not corrupt. It means the US' system has limited their freedom to misbehave.
US candidates must declare the political donations they have received. If they fail to do this, they are faced with lawsuits. Naturally those who break the law would have to retire from the political arena.
But in Taiwan, whether one breaks the law depends on one's own definition and whether one has to leave the political arena is one's own choice. Such a big gray area should make US politicians jealous in the extreme.
The US' Lobby Law stipulates that politicians must fill out forms after meetings with representatives of interest groups to record the time and place of the meeting and the issues discussed.
This is the only way to rein in corruption. But in Taiwan, business conglomerates have various channels through which they can meet with important government officials.
Former US vice president Al Gore was criticized for making calls from his White House office to raise funds. To be frank, the people of Taiwan are very envious of such a "scandal." Comparing that with the allegations of corruption in our presidential campaign, it is clear that, although our referendum laws are more "democratic" than those in the US, our democracy still has a long way to go.
Emile Sheng is an associate professor of political science at Soochow University.
Translated by Jackie Lin
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS