Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) needs more than the “classes on social skills or diplomatic etiquette” that he said his aides want him to take.
Being a “loose cannon” — as foreign media outlets described him after the diplomatic gaffe over the gift of a watch from British Minister of State for Transport Susan Kramer — or eccentric can be refreshing in politics, where sly remarks and posturing manners are the mainstream, but what is worrying about Ko is more than his faux pas.
People have praised his talent for self-correction and public, no-holds-barred apologies, which are rarely seen in Taiwanese politicians. Insofar as Ko emphasized standard operating procedures and efficiency in administration, it is not difficult to imagine him not being troubled at all by what he probably considers to be mannerisms (while some attribute the characteristics to Asperger syndrome, which Ko himself says he has). However, his recent remarks on colonization being positively related to progress — which left many gasping — has exposed a mentality that embodies Taiwan’s predicament: a lack of a sense of history, and the entailing nonchalance over how people had suffered under past repression.
The colonization talk was not the first shocking remark — in terms of historical consciousness and democratic values — that Ko has made, and it will probably not be the last.
Just days ago, the mayor called the current wiretapping permit application system “a hindrance to investigation” and said police officers should be allowed to “act first, report later.”
Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Tuan Yi-kang (段宜康) said the proposal trampled human rights, and said Ko might have regretted that he could not meet former prosecutor-general Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘) — who was forced out of office after being convicted of charges related to wiretapping Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) — earlier.
While campaigning, Ko said that he held former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) rule in high regard, acclaiming the then-government’s “integrity.” Many, including Tuan, took offense at Ko’s misplaced praise, reminding Ko that the atrocities of the White Terror were not restricted to a single ethnic group or political stance, but affected all Taiwanese.
“The victims were not only those who had been murdered, jailed or forced into exile, but all Taiwanese who were deprived of their rights and had their minds straitjacketed,” Tuan said. “And the more dreadful damage was the domestication and self-hypnosis of Taiwanese, who even now, in a Stockholm syndrome-like manner, hail the pillagers with gratitude for offering us what had in the beginning belonged to us.”
The repression and discrimination exemplified by colonization were similarly unjust in essence, and should not be justified by any “modernization,” which arguably was a side effect of the rule. History shows that colonization cannot be desultorily simplified as causally contributing to “laudable outcomes,” as Ko did.
Ko’s remarks and their implications ironically echo China’s line that economic development and “harmony” trumps democratic self-rule, which Beijing claims is incompatible with “Chinese culture,” as Singapore — a model both the Chinese government and Ko have hailed as an ideal — has shown with its semi-authoritarian rule.
What Ko needs are history and social science classes to familiarize him with the nation’s development as well as its price, and both its modernization and the exploitation it suffered. His lack of knowledge of these issues is also a consequence of state repression during a certain period of this nation’s history.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS