Dear Mr. Ma Ying-jeou (
Warm greetings to you from Singapore. I understand that you are visiting Singapore and would like to welcome you. I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your candidacy in Taiwan's presidential election next year.
However, I read with great dismay in Singapore's Straits Times on June 2 that "Ma cites Singapore as an example for Taiwan." In the report, you were quoted as saying that "Singapore is different from us [Taiwan] as its emphasis is not on democratization. Nevertheless, it is professional, corruption-free and efficient, which is worth our learning" and that "The Singapore Government is very efficient. They can reach consensus easily and there is no squabbling or fighting."
The paper also said that you had cited the high pay of Singaporean ministers as one example of the country's pragmatism.
Perhaps what you have read or heard about Singapore is the official line. The government puts out a lot of misinformation and propaganda. Please allow me to reveal some truths.
The "corruption-free" image that the People's Action Party (PAP) government projects to the world stems from the fact that the state's leaders have used draconian laws to silence its critics. Opposition politicians have been bankrupted, imprisoned and run out of the country for trying to hold the government responsible to Singaporeans.
In the numerous civil lawsuits and criminal trials which the country's leaders and the government have brought against their dissenters, the courts have always ruled against the defendants.
All forms of media here are controlled by the authorities. Newspapers, magazines, TV and radio networks are owned by the state. Even Internet service providers are government-owned.
Singapore has been dominated by the PAP since the 1960s. The party has always had more than 95 percent of the seats in parliament even if it might have less than 70 percent of popular support. Elections in Singapore are far from free and fair. The Elections Department is answerable to the Prime Minister's Office. The Group Constituency Representation was established in 1988 to deal with the rising unpopularity of the ruling party. During elections, the government hands out bribes in the form of shares that can be cashed in. This, in the view of many in Singapore, is vote-buying. Lee Kuan Yew (
These are just some of the tactics that the PAP government uses to ensure that it wins with a overwhelming majority in each election.
As you have noted, Singaporean ministers are highly paid. The prime minister of Singapore is paid 12 times what Taiwan's president earns. Even the salary of a junior minister here is more than seven times that of President Chen Shui-bian (
Other countries are also looking at Singapore as a role-model for economic success. Thailand (under ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra), Hong Kong (under former chief executive Tung Chee-hwa (
However, economic progress and political development are not mutually exclusive. In trying to follow the Singapore model, political and social landscapes will be severely and negatively affected. The type of "affluence" achieved in Singapore cannot be realized without the suppression of rights and basic freedoms.
While you say that Singapore's emphasis is not on democracy, you also say that the government is corruption-free. Yet I am certain that you are aware that democracy is the most effective way to hold a government accountable and ensure a corruption-free system.
I am sure that the people of Taiwan cherish their hard-won political freedom and are proud to live in a democratic society, a society they contribute to and continue to shape. In fact, in many ways democracy advocates in Singapore draw inspiration from Taiwan in its transformation from martial law to a bona fide democracy.
I am perturbed that a leader from one of Asia's most vibrant and proud democracies should cite the PAP as a model-of-sorts. I sincerely hope that during your visit to Singapore you will express support for Singapore's struggle for democracy.
Chee Siok Chin
Singapore Democratic Party
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS