National Palace Museum director Wu Mi-cha (吳密察) late last month, while being questioned by a legislator, said that three ceramic items from the collecition had been damaged over the previous 18 months.
Social commentator Lucifer Chu (朱學恒) lambasted the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), writing on Facebook that the three treasures had escaped the clutches of the Chinese Communist Party, having been transfered to Taiwan unscathed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), but had now been destroyed under Wu’s oversight.
It is an overwhelming embarrassment and shame for the nation that pieces of a heritage that has been passed down for four centuries have been shattered.
The Chinese Global Times newspaper published an article saying that the incident was not an “accident,” but a result of the DPP’s push for “desinicization,” and that the party’s agenda was the main reason for the damage.
However, the Global Times refrained from calling the incident a “national embarrassment” for fear of implying that Taiwan is indeed an independent nation.
In response to the scandal, DPP Legislator Lin Yi-chin (林宜瑾), who is on the legislature’s Education and Culture Committee, said that during former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration, the museum had also come under fire for an incident in which a priceless print titled Yellow River and Lanzhou Floating Bridge (黃河蘭州浮橋圖) was damaged.
During preparation for an exhibition, the museum had ordered parts of the original frame to be cut off so that the print could be displayed in a specific casing. It was only when the misconduct was later exposed that the collections section reported the incident in confidence to then-museum director Feng Ming-chu (馮明珠).
However, Feng was neither referred to the review board nor the Government Employee Ethics Unit, and the scandal was swept under the carpet.
Even though Feng claimed that accidental damage was a first in its history, the museum has made a series of blunders in the past, and has twice been censured by the Control Yuan.
Li Dao-yong is director of the City South Culture and History Studio.
Translated by Rita Wang
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS