People First Party (PFP) lawmakers leveled some disgraceful accusations on Wednesday: they alleged, without providing evidence, that not only had President Chen Shui-bian (
Just when voters thought that the nation's legislators had hit rock bottom with their distasteful campaign shtick, the PFP has managed to do one better. But should anyone be surprised, given that the PFP has been rapidly moving to the very extreme of the political spectrum? They had, after all, incited their supporters and a number of gangsters to launch attacks on the Presidential Office and a Kaohsiung court after the presidential election, dashing any pretence of moderation on their part.
These last four years, PFP legislators have been able to bask in the glow of PFP Chairman James Soong (
The accusations, it turns out, came from a radio program hosted by former New Party stalwart and media mogul Jaw Shaw-kong (
What does it say about the credibility of Jaw that he would lend weight to media reports from China, where journalism largely serves as a mouthpiece for the government and where Chen is labeled a traitor for advocating Taiwanese independence? If Jaw's idea of fact-checking is searching Google, then nothing complimentary can be said about him or his organization.
Why did they not check with those who, according to the story, had personally witnessed Moscoso show off the alleged check? Why did they not attempt to locate the check itself? Bent on exposing their own Watergate, these "journalists" don't seem to know or care that investigative journalism is a hard slog -- as Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein discovered investigating a head of state and his aides.
On Wednesday, Presidential Office Secretary-General Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) said legal action would be taken against those who made the accusations. This is an option that should never be exercised vindictively, but in this instance, it is perfectly warranted. Otherwise, unless Jaw and the PFP retract their accusations and apologize, the dignity of the office of the president and that of Taiwan's allies will have been trashed.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS