As a former governor of Alaska (2002 to 2006) and also having served for 22 years in the US Senate, I have a strong interest in US relations with East Asia. Within that context, Taiwan is a place close to my heart, because I personally got to know the two men who pushed Taiwan in the direction of democracy, former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
Since that time, Taiwan has gone through some more cycles of change of government, which is an inherent part of a democratic system.
Indeed, in January, I headed the observer mission of the International Committee for Fair Elections in Taiwan (ICFET), an international group of 19 academics from eight countries.
Our report on our findings is scheduled to come out in the next few weeks and I can already say that our conclusion is that the elections were mostly free, but only partly fair. You can read more details when the report comes out.
However, my comments here are not about the elections, but about the overall direction of the country.
It is undoubtedly clear that Taiwan lives in the shadow of an aggressive neighbor, but it should not allow that to determine its future as a free and democratic nation.
Taiwanese have worked long and hard for their democracy, and they need to continue to work hard to preserve and nurture their freedom and liberty. This work needs to be done internally, when they assess the functioning of the system of checks and balances — the legislature needs to be a stronghold of democracy where people with vision look after the longer-term interests of their constituents.
Freedom and liberty also need to be nurtured in the judicial system.
Many observers say that the judiciary is still strongly influenced by the politics of the ruling party and that there is a strong need for judicial reform. The legal community needs to champion the democratic process in Taiwan.
This brings me to a very specific issue of injustice — the way Chen is being treated. I am not discussing whether he was or was not guilty — although a number of international observers, such as Jerome Cohen, question whether he received a fair trial.
I am specifically focusing on his need for adequate medical treatment and the conditions under which he is being detained.
Most recently, on May 23, Chen was allowed to go to Cheng Kung Memorial Hospital for only six hours. Doctors said that they would need much more time to treat him adequately and that the six-hour time span had been a “political condition” imposed by the authorities.
The right thing to do would be for the authorities to release him on medical parole.
The second aspect is the conditions under which he is being detained — a small cell, with no bed, chair or desk.
If he wants to write, he has to lie down on the floor. Such treatment is unconscionable and reminiscent of the Soviet Union more than 45 years ago, not Taiwan in 2012.
The least that needs to be done is to give him an adequate cell, with a chair, desk and regular bed. Like other prisoners, he should be allowed to work outside his cell in the daytime, engaging in some physical activity. Finally, he should have full access to his lawyer and comprehensive medical care.
Dealing with controversial issues like this is not easy, but a fair and humanitarian resolution is essential if Taiwan wants to be considered a full democracy, worthy of international respect.
Frank Murkowski is a former governor of Alaska and a US senator.
French firm DCI-DESCO in April won a bid to upgrade Taiwan’s Lafayette frigates, which has strained ties between China and France. In 1991, France sold Taiwan six Lafayette frigates and in 1992 sold it 60 Mirage 2000 fighter jets. To prevent arms sales between the nations, China negotiated an agreement with France and in 1994 in a joint statement, France promised that there would be no future arms sales to Taiwan. From China’s point of view, the DCI-DESCO deal constitutes a breach of the agreement, but the French stance is that it is not selling Taiwan new weapons, but instead providing a
Chung Yuan ChristiaN University is clearly in bed with the People’s Republic of China. This can be the only explanation why the school’s authorities have done their utmost to shield a student, who lodged a complaint against an associate professor, and then used thuggish tactics to compel the teacher to issue two separate apologies to China. The original complaint, filed by an unnamed Chinese student, was for remarks by associate professor Chao Ming-wei (招名威) during a class on the origin of COVID-19. A second complaint was filed by the same student after Chao, during an apology, stated that he was a
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in her inaugural address on May 20 firmly said: “We will not accept the Beijing authorities’ use of ‘one country, two systems’ to downgrade Taiwan and undermine the cross-strait status quo.” The Chinese government was not too happy, and later that day, an opinion piece on the Web site of China’s state broadcaster China Central Television said: “While Tsai’s first inaugural address four years ago was read by Beijing as an ‘unfinished answer sheet,’ the one she presented this time was even more below-par.” Speaking to the China Review News Agency, Shanghai Institutes for International Studies vice president
During my twenty-two years in the US Senate, I became a student of Taiwan and its history. I was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia, the Pacific and International Cybersecurity Policy, and have made at least 25 trips to Taiwan and have been invited as an observer to two of the nation’s presidential elections. Taiwan’s continuous economic miracle has seen the nation transition from a mixed agricultural-industrial society at the end of Japan’s 50 years of jurisdiction to today’s economic powerhouse, unmatched by most nations of the world. Just as outstanding has been Taiwan’s decades of resistance and