During election campaigns, candidates come under scrutiny not only for their policies and platforms, but also their moral character, trustworthiness, education, and financial and other assets. As long as it is not an unsubstantiated rumor or evidence fabricated to vilify a candidate, this is a legitimate part of any campaign.
However, in an attempt to the shift the focus away from allegations that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice presidential candidate Jennifer Wang (王如玄) engaged in speculative transactions of military apartments, the KMT has attacked Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), accusing her of purchasing and selling land in a rezoned area in Taipei’s Neihu District (內湖) and earning NT$180 million (US$5.45 million).
It is not difficult to understand why the KMT is doing this, although it is questionable if it will have any effect.
There are three aspects to this issue.
First, information transparency versus non-transparent activities: On Jan. 15, 1985, the Taipei City Government announced detailed plans for building a light industry zone in Neihu. This information was open and transparent, with the government banning land transfers, division and construction beginning on Aug. 27, 1988.
On March 1, Tsai purchased 271 ping (896m2) of land, which was transferred to her name on April 15. In what way is this timing problematic?
Compare this with the conversion of veterans’ villages into military housing units: From tearing down the old buildings to completing the new military housing units and distributing them through a lottery process, the process is rife with opportunities for plotting and scheming. Not even the soldiers in the old veterans’ villages had any insight and they had no choice but to do as the Ministry of National Defense said. However, this complete lack of transparency gives those who are extremely resourceful and well-connected a chance to manipulate the process.
Second, investment versus speculation: Buying a property and holding it for a long time before selling it is investing. However, buying and then selling it within a short period of time is speculating.
Tsai bought 15 plots of land — on average only 18 ping each — for a total of 271 ping which, after rezoning, was reduced to 149 ping in 1988, and sold them all in 1997 — nine years later. Is this investment or speculation?
Wang, on the other hand, bought 12 military housing units, sold two of them less than a year after they were purchased, and sold the others between one and three years after they were bought. Is this investment or speculation?
Wang keeps saying that her moral standards are impeccable, but I am not sure everyone agrees with that.
Finally, there is the issue of legality. As long as one has money — and this, of course, includes Wang — one can legally buy and sell rezoned land. However, can anyone who has money — still, including Wang, of course — buy military housing units prior to or during the lockup period in which trading is prohibited?
Of the 12 units that Wang has admitted to trading, not one was bought before the five-year lockup period expired. This raises several questions about insider information, insider trading and illegal actions.
Buying and selling real estate legally is not a problem, regardless of how much profit you make. However, obtaining real estate from unclear sources or through improper means is wrong.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Perry Svensson
As a person raised in a family that revered the teachings of Confucius (孔子) and Mencius (孟子), I believe that both sages would agree with Hong Kong students that people-based politics is the only legitimate way to govern China, including Hong Kong. More than two millennia ago, Confucius insisted that a leader’s first loyalty is to his people — they are water to the leader’s ship. Confucius said that the water could let the ship float only if it sailed in accordance with the will of the water. If the ship sailed against the will of the water, the ship would sink. Two
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just dropped the other shoe in the White House’s multidimensional response to the hydra-headed existential challenge from communist China. Yet his sweeping address at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum on Thursday was the most powerful yet — a virtual declaration of a new cold war and a call for global delegitimization of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) rule through what amounts to regime change. Although he did not explicitly mention either a cold war or regime change — terms that send shudders through the foreign policy establishment — Pompeo made it clear that
The US Navy’s aircraft carrier battle groups are the most dramatic symbol of Washington’s military and geopolitical power. They were critical to winning World War II in the Pacific and have since been deployed in the Indo-Pacific region to communicate resolve against potential adversaries of the US. The presence or absence of the US Seventh Fleet — the configuration of US Navy ships and aircraft in the Indo-Pacific region built around the carriers — generally determines whether war or peace prevails in the region. In the immediate post-war period, Washington’s strategic planners in the administration of then-US president Harry Truman shockingly
This year, India and Taiwan can look back on 25 years of so-called unofficial ties. This provides an occasion to ponder over how they can deepen collaboration and strengthen their relations. This reflection must be free from excitement and agitation caused by the ongoing China-US great power jostling as well as China’s aggressive actions against many of its neighbors, including India. It must be based on long-term trends in bilateral engagement. To begin with, India and Taiwan, thus far, have had relations constituted by various activities, but what needs to be thought about now is whether they can transform their ties