As the intrigue surrounding the Lafayette scandal deepens, it is easy to lose sight of the larger issues at stake. This is especially true in the run-up to tomorrow's local government elections as various officials attempt to politicize the details of the scandal.
The latest spurt of effort in the investigation into the 12-year-old saga comes as authorities begin digging through information supplied by the Swiss government, which released the files last month.
The new information includes details about a number of bank accounts suspected of being used to channel kickbacks to a variety of people. This has led to a series of accusations against a wide array of officials both inside and outside Taiwan, including former president Lee Teng-hui (
The scandal erupted after the murder of navy Captain Yin Ching-feng (
Former premier Hau has even filed a lawsuit against four prominent DPP officials after he became the target of their allegations. Hau, it was claimed, masterminded the Lafayette deal -- supposedly without the knowledge of then-president Lee. Hau traveled to France in 1989, and recommended that Taiwan purchase the frigates, as opposed to South Korean-made ships, after he returned.
The DPP has claimed that the ensuing morass of kickbacks, corruption and murder all occurred without the knowledge of former president Lee. But making such a claim makes little sense in any context other than election gimmickry.
If the Lafayette scandal does involve millions of dollars being funneled to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), arms dealers and French, Taiwanese and Chinese officials, as the DPP claimed, then surely it is wrong to rule out anyone before all the facts are known.
The real problem with making obviously politicized claims in this important investigation is that it weakens the ability of investigators to target dirty officials.
It is a simple case of crying wolf -- if people see that lawmakers are trying to manipulate the investigation's details for political gain, how will they know when something serious has come to light?
Most importantly, the investigation into the Lafayette scandal should provide an opportunity to root out the vestiges of the corrupt authoritarian era and strengthen Taiwan's democratization. It should not be viewed as merely an excuse to further divide public opinion and exacerbate the current political stalemate.
Of course it is possible that the KMT benefited directly from the Lafayette kickbacks. But as we are seeing with the DPP's difficulties over the Kaohsiung MRT scandal, graft is not solely a pan-blue curse.
Most importantly, it is the responsibility of politicians from both the pan-green and pan-blue camps to remember that they now have a chance to right a years-old wrong and avenge the brutal, cold-blooded murder of a man who swore to defend his country, and died trying to expose those who would weaken it.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS