Almost five years on from the assassination attempt on the eve of the 2004 presidential election and there are still people out there trying to prove that it was staged.
It is hard to believe that even after extensive police and judicial investigations concluded that shooter Chen Yi-hsiung (陳義雄) was the only person involved, and the twice-convened and unconstitutional 319 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee failed to produce any credible evidence, there are those who will not let it lie.
They still believe that the incident was part of an elaborate conspiracy staged by former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to ensure he was re-elected.
The latest episode in these risible efforts came on Wednesday when Control Yuan member Frank Wu (吳豐山) produced a report in which he claimed the prosecutors’ investigation had several flaws. In the report, Wu said that Chen Yi-hsiung’s motive was not fully explained and that the scene of his death was not properly described. Wu also cast doubt on the conclusions of the ballistics studies.
However, as in the case of the 319 committee’s report there was a lot of speculation and conjecture, but no solid conclusions. Which raises the question, why was Wu tasked with producing such a report in the first place?
Wu is a journalist by trade and has served as chief of both the Independence Evening Post and the Public Television Service. Both are respectable positions in their own right but hardly make him qualified to pick holes in a specialist forensics report, no matter how many episodes of CSI he has watched.
Yet Wu has been allowed to spend the best part of a year wasting the time of several important government officials in compiling his report at the taxpayer’s expense.
Even the darling of the pan-blue camp, forensics expert Henry Lee (李昌鈺), said back in 2006 that there comes a time when investigations should be closed because of lack of evidence. Yet here we are, three years later, in the same situation with prosecutors apparently still investigating the incident.
When are these people going to realize that no matter how much they want it, there is nothing else to uncover?
The last year or so — with his trial and conviction on corruption charges and the ongoing probes into every aspect of his presidential dealings — has proved beyond doubt that the former president has very few friends, if any, in the establishment.
Had such a conspiracy been perpetrated there would have been at least one or two people willing to come forward and spill the beans. Yet in all this time no such person has appeared.
Still, the relentless campaign to discredit Chen even further continues, orchestrated by people who seem determined to grind the former president into the dust. It seems they will not be satisfied until every one of Chen’s achievements has been discredited or expunged from the annals of history.
It is a sad testament to the lack of maturity in Taiwan’s democracy that such people retain sway over the highest echelons of government and are able to manipulate institutions like the Control Yuan with which to do their bidding.
The sooner such a situation is remedied, the better.
As the war in Burma stretches into its 76th year, China continues to play both sides. Beijing backs the junta, which seized power in the 2021 coup, while also funding some of the resistance groups fighting the regime. Some suggest that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is hedging his bets, positioning China to side with the victors regardless of the outcome. However, a more accurate explanation is that China is acting pragmatically to safeguard its investments and ensure the steady flow of natural resources and energy for its economy. China’s primary interest is stability and supporting the junta initially seemed like the best
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and
Numerous expert analyses characterize today’s US presidential election as a risk for Taiwan, given that the two major candidates, US Vice President Kamala Harris and former US president Donald Trump, are perceived to possess divergent foreign policy perspectives. If Harris is elected, many presume that the US would maintain its existing relationship with Taiwan, as established through the American Institute in Taiwan, and would continue to sell Taiwan weapons and equipment to help it defend itself against China. Under the administration of US President Joe Biden, whose political views Harris shares, the US on Oct. 25 authorized arms transfers to Taiwan, another
Navy Commander Admiral Tang Hua (唐華) said in an interview with The Economist that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been implementing an “anaconda strategy” to subdue Taiwan since President William Lai (賴清德) assumed office. The Chinese military is “slowly, but surely” increasing its presence around Taiwan proper, it quoted Tang as saying. “They are ready to blockade Taiwan at any time they want,” he said. “They give you extreme pressure, pressure, pressure. They’re trying to exhaust you.” Beijing’s goal is to “force Taiwan to make mistakes,” Tang said, adding that they could be “excuses” for a blockade. The interview reminds me