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
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has