Even on the eve of the presidential inauguration and with the Capitol under lockdown, many people in the US are wondering: What happened to America’s democracy?
What is the proper response to the storming of the Capitol in Washington?
In Taiwan, a photograph comparing a Taiwanese student protester freely drinking beer in the Legislative Yuan to US Capitol Police pointing guns at rioters lying face down on the ground has gone viral.
Taiwanese media have portrayed the US response to the Capitol riot as having a forceful police presence, while the Sunflower movement protests in the Legislative Yuan are seen as having a soft police response. These comparisons spark concerns that the police response to the Sunflower movement sit-in in Taiwan might have been too weak.
The slant of the media might be what makes the Capitol Police’s response seem stronger. Despite the locations being equivalent, the two events should not be equated.
In the US, the media highlighted rioters’ clown-like acts and police reactions. Photos of people occupying the US vice president’s seat and putting their feet up on US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s desk have become the images of the event.
However, when these pictures get taken out of context, it paints a completely different idea of what happened and what the Capitol riot means.
The storming of the Capitol was an angry response to the results of the presidential election. Supporters of US President Donald Trump believed that “illegitimate” votes were threatening democracy, flipping states blue, and suppressing their voices. Upset by the reality that Democrats would have control of the White House and both chambers of the US Congress, they stormed the Capitol on the day of the electoral vote confirmation.
Based on some of the images that have gone viral in Taiwan, it would appear that the rioters were just acting the clown, and that police were forceful in protecting the Capitol and its people.
In reality, rioters were armed with guns and bombs. They tarred and feathered effigies of representatives, while the Confederate flag — a symbol of white supremacy and racism — was carried into the building. Legislators hid amid the confirmation count of electoral votes.
The riot endangered the continuation of the democratic process and free elections. A lack or lapse of law enforcement contributed to the appalling behavior.
While some officers fought to protect the Capitol and Congress, many opened doors and let protesters in. Such officers, who are designated to protect Washington and government officials, did little to stop rioters from trespassing and burglarizing the Capitol, committing battery, and threatening the lives of elected members of Congress and employees.
Law enforcement failed to enforce the law.
On the other hand, in the Sunflower movement sit-in of the Legislative Yuan in 2014, demonstrators occupied the building in protest of the passing of the cross-strait service trade agreement in 30 seconds without a clause-by-clause review.
The addendum to the 2010 Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement with China reduced tariffs and commercial barriers between the two countries.
Student-led protesters feared that an increase in economic dependence on China would threaten Taiwan’s businesses, freedom of expression and national security.
When police initially cracked down on the protesters with batons and water cannons, they faced a huge public outcry. People empathized with the students’ desire to protect their economic opportunities and civil liberties, and supported them throughout the occupation.
Aspects of Chinese history, such as the military crackdown in Tiananmen Square, made law enforcement violence against students unacceptable to the public. It would have sent an anti-democracy message.
Many higher-ranking politicians who ordered the police crackdown were asked to resign, and either apologized or disappeared from the political sphere. Their disappearance from the media allowed the initial brutality of the event to be forgotten. Throughout the rest of the 24 day sit-in, police seemed to take a hands-off approach. Protesters sat, sang and gave speeches defending their cause.
Now, many cite the movement as a prime example of civil disobedience for true democracy.
The restraint that police showed in response to the Sunflower movement sit-in made their response powerful.
The reasons behind the Sunflower movement protesters’ and Trump supporters’ actions were fundamentally different. One was a protest, calling for the protection of people’s rights, the other was an attempt at insurgency and a threat to democracy. Such distinctions define the appropriateness of the responses of law enforcement personnel in the two situations.
The Capitol Police’s response to the rioters might have appeared forceful to Taiwanese media, but considering the rioters’ actions and the level of force normally used by law enforcement in the US, the response was abnormally lenient.
The Capitol riots should be remembered for the acts of terrorism and blatant disrespect for the democratic process, and as a time when the law enforcement response was weak and did not match the threat to democracy.
The Sunflower movement should be remembered as it already is: a mostly peaceful protest where restraint was shown by police, and a testament to the power of democracy.
Jeannette Wang is a junior at Los Altos High School in California. Jamie Wang is a freshman at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under