Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) for the past few weeks has been embroiled in a controversy about the use of so-called cyberarmies.
An accusation first surfaced on June 2, when Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Taipei City Councilor Wang Min-sheng (王閔生) said in a council hearing that the account “LoveError” had been using the Professional Technology Temple online bulletin board system to disseminate false information and attack the party.
“LoveError” is reported to have said that Taiwanese had to show the “correct” political affiliation to obtain COVID-19 medicine. Along with “going70” and “going9,” the account used IP addresses inside the Taipei City Government and were found to belong to one user, an employee from the Taipei Expo Foundation. Several city councilors investigated the incident, revealing that six other employees were also using the platform during work hours in attempts to manipulate public opinion, including Lin Yu-sheng (林育生), a section head in the Taipei Department of Transportation.
During a question-and-answer session, Social Democratic Party Taipei City Councilor Miao Po-ya (苗博雅) asked Lin to read the posts out loud and confirm their details. Ko had initially brushed off the incident, saying the employees “had too much time on their hands,” but after the council session, he was indignant toward Miao, saying that civil servants are not political pawns, and that councilors have no right to question civil servants or humiliate them in public. The incident and his reaction have revealed several aspects about Ko’s double standards and his administration in general.
Ko is incorrect to say that councilors have no right to question civil servants. It is a city councilor’s duty to supervise a local government and ensure that public funds go where they should. Councilors would be derelict in their duties if they turned a blind eye to these civil servants, who should remain politically neutral, but who apparently used public expenses to disseminate false information to Ko’s benefit.
By asking Lin to read the posts into the public record, Miao was confirming authorship, avoiding potential excuses from being given down the road, such as an account being hacked. As the session was livestreamed and accessible to the public, citizens and the media would not have hesitated to criticize Miao had there been any inappropriate humiliation.
Further, Ko has been applying a double standard toward the issue of cyberarmies. Given that he famously coined the term “1450” to refer to online advocates paid by the DPP to disparage him on the Internet, it is ironic that his employees were exposed committing the same act.
Ko’s indignation has also shown that he does not think that there was misconduct with his administration or that he should be held accountable. Famous for using unsavory language when criticizing people — especially when he said “Whose dog is that?” in reference to Lin Shu-hui (林恕暉) during a committee meeting in April — Ko has again betrayed his emperor complex.
As a politician who has insulted civil servants on multiple occasions in the past, Ko is showing that he believes that the only one who can judge his subordinates is him, while others, not even city councilors with the duty to supervise, can offer an opinion.
Ko is also leaving the false impression that he stands behind the civil servants, when in reality he is afraid of losing face, as the incident demonstrates his double standards and acquiescence of misconduct when it is in his favor.
Ko should surrender his emperor complex and help investigate the truth regarding the controversy, instead of creating a diversion with his furious comments.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
RSS