Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) has drawn criticism at home and from Taiwanese expatriates over comments made during his current trip to the US, some of which might haunt him for years to come, as his “two sides of the [Taiwan] Strait are one family” remark has done.
Ko’s remarks, be they off-the cuff responses to reporters or those made in official speeches since he became mayor on Dec. 25, 2014, have prompted outrage so regularly that it has become the norm.
The problem with cherry-picking politicians’ statements to criticize — in this nation or elsewhere — is that all too often the context of the remark is lost or deliberately ignored.
For example, Ko’s infamous “one family” statement, for which he has repeatedly apologized, was first made at a Taipei-Shanghai twin city forum in 2015 and again in 2017, when the Taipei City Government was busying planning the 2017 Summer Universiade and hoping to have Chinese athletes attend.
His comments on Sunday to Taiwanese students in New York City that Taiwan’s political scene shows the nation is not governed by the law is likely to prove equally problematic.
Ko was talking about honesty and respect for the law when he was quoted as saying: “The law is meant for people to obey, not for people to refer to, but Taiwan has never been a country governed according to the rule of law ... we have never been a country of honesty” and “if people had to resign for lying, there would be no more politicians in Taipei.”
One can disagree with Ko’s comment about Taiwan not being governed by the rule of law, but recognize the kernel of truth in his comments about politicians and honesty.
After all, just last month former Hualien County commissioner Fu Kun-chi (?) was sentenced to two years and 10 months in prison by the Taiwan High Court in the final ruling in a case of insider trading and speculative stock trading dating back to 1997.
Lest we forget, then-independent lawmaker Lo Fu-chu (羅福助) became a member of the legislature’s judicial committee in 1998, along with other committee memberships, despite having been involved in organized crime for decades, being detained under “Operation Clean Sweep” for three years and running for elected office basically to avoid further prosecution.
Ko also told the students that many Taiwanese naively wish to see swift changes within two or three years, instead of slow, but steady progress — another truism.
While many people, including Ko supporters, hope that he might learn to exercise more care before he speaks, he has the right to speak his mind, and so it was disquieting to hear that the president of the Taiwan Association of America has urged the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and the US government to “exercise caution” if asked to approve further visits by Ko.
In a letter to AIT Chairman James Moriarty, the association said that Ko is moving closer to the Chinese Communist Party’s agenda, ignorant of strategic initiatives and trying to curry favor with China.
Were such warnings given during or after trips to the US, China and Britain by then-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Lien Chan (連戰) when he strongly criticized then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his administration’s policies, or about remarks made by former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) — including those made on his overseas trips when he was still mayor of Taipei — or several other pan-blue camp politicians?
If people are unhappy with Ko’s comments about the rule of law or other topics, then they should prove him wrong, not seek to silence him. That is what being a democracy and respecting the right to free speech is all about.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS