The Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) mayoral candidate in Tainan, Kao Su-po (高思博), has complained that the city is the only special municipality without a Hakka Affairs Council.
He said that although the Hakka community make up 6 percent of Tainan’s population and Aborigines make up only 0.4 percent, 44.5 percent of the city’s Ethnic Affairs Commission budget — NT$27.74 million (US$907,277) — goes to indigenous communities, while Hakka get only 19.8 percent, or NT$12.34 million.
Kao said this contravenes the proportionality principle.
Taiwan’s indigenous communities have long been politically, economically and culturally disadvantaged. Following hundreds of years of foreign rule and colonialism, it has been difficult for them to overturn the many injustices — despite calls in recent years for transitional justice and ethnic diversity entering the mainstream — the most serious of which is the “data management chauvinism” that the government resorts to at every turn.
The government’s seemingly scientific viewpoint that “indigenous people only make up 2 percent of the population, so they will not get this, that or the other” — a manipulative trick used as elections approach — reinforces the public’s misunderstanding of the “data approach,” making people even less able to analyze and understand justice, and even decontextualize it.
The special municipality created with the merger of Tainan city and county in 2011 is the only one that does not have a dedicated authority to handle indigenous affairs as required by the Indigenous Peoples Basic Act (原住民族基本法).
For eight years, I and others have used every possible channel to lobby for the creation of this body. The legally stipulated staff, resources and budget would have a great effect on resources and support for Tainan’s indigenous people, as can be easily gauged by looking at budgets and staff allocations in the other five special municipalities.
Although the Hakka Basic Act (客家基本法) does not stipulate the establishment of a dedicated authority to handle Hakka affairs, I have expressed my approval of such an authority working for the promotion and protection of Hakka culture, rights and interests.
However, Kao does not make an attempt to increase the pie as the starting point of his election pledges. Instead, he attacks other ethnicities and makes an issue out of the commission’s budget allocations.
Not to make any baseless assumptions about this being about populations and votes, but if Kao is comparing the Aboriginal population to the Hakka population and abandons the smaller group, would he also abandon the Hakka for a larger group?
If he were to encounter small, disadvantaged groups in City Hall, would his support be based on the same approach?
Furthermore, not all the budget allocations come from the Tainan City Government: It also includes central government allocations.
Kao, who has served as a legislator, should not be a stranger to how budget allocations work.
In addition, the commission’s allocations include a budget for a planning department whose main task should be to initiate and reinvigorate policies for Tainan’s Siraya community. Why was that left out? Could it be another case of considering populations?
Politicians should show their concern for society and take a long, hard look at the true meaning of fairness and justice, especially as transitional justice for indigenous people is being widely discussed.
Politicians must not use ethnic issues to promote their electoral prospects in a pretense of righteousness. The public and the nation’s best interests are served by having politicians who have values and use reason.
Ingay Tali is an Amis Aborigine living in Tainan.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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