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.
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