Jhongsing New Village (中興新村), an oasis of green in the foothills of Hushan (虎山) in Nantou County, was previously home to the Taiwan Provincial Government. However, since most of the provincial government’s functions were streamlined after the 1997 constitutional amendments, various proposals have been forwarded to put the 200-hectare site to better use.
Among the most noteworthy proposals are one by the former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration, which proposed turning the site into a hub for international non-governmental organizations, and another by the current Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government to transform it into a cultural innovation and advanced research park.
However, none of the proposals have come to fruition.
In fact, most people have forgotten about the existence of the provincial government — that is, until recently, when disgraced former foreign affairs official Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英) was assigned to a post there.
Kuo, former secretary of the now defunct Government Information Office in Toronto, Canada, was dismissed from office in 2009 when he was found to have made disparaging comments about ethnic Taiwanese. In February this year, two weeks shy of his 65th birthday, Kuo was appointed foreign affairs secretary at the provincial government, with a monthly salary of NT$70,000 (US$2,333). That gave him just enough time to fulfill service requirements to be able to retire with a lifelong pension of NT$60,000 a month.
The public outrage over Kuo’s appointment has also refocused attention on this dysfunctional public institution.
Since the constitutional changes, the Taiwan Provincial Government has effectively become a nominal institution, with its duties and powers largely transferred to central government agencies under the Executive Yuan. However, the annual budget earmarked for this institution, along with the Taiwan Provincial Consultative Council (previously the Taiwan Provincial Assembly), remains as high as NT$233.6 million. About 70 percent of the budget is used to pay the governor, 21 members of the consultative council and about 90 staff who seldom do a lick of work.
The 1997 constitutional amendments also streamlined the nation’s Fujian Provincial Government, transferring most of its authority to two of its administrative districts, the Kinmen County Government and Lienchiang County Government, commonly known as Matsu, while an annual budget of NT$110 million is allocated for the operation of the Fujian Provincial Government.
The Taiwan Provincial Government was made redundant after the nation’s electoral districts were altered to represent only people living in Taiwan — and not China — and direct presidential elections began in the 1990s. The provincial government was not terminated outright at that time, but was streamlined mainly to allay apprehension among pro-unification groups that negating Taiwan’s status as a province was a move to promote Taiwanese independence.
Since then, efforts to scrap the institution have become even harder, especially after the 2005 constitutional amendments. The changes set an extremely high threshold for constitutional revisions: approval from three-quarters of lawmakers and at least 50 percent of the whole electorate. Moreover, concern that dismantling the Taiwan Provincial Government would be tantamount to moving toward Taiwanese independence would certainly resurface and complicate what should be a simple matter.
Seventeen years have passed, but the proposals to rejuvenate Jhongsing New Village are likely to remain on paper only.
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