As an alumnus of National Tsing Hua University (NTHU), I am deeply concerned about the recent fiasco regarding a promised donation to the university by United Microelectronics Corp (UMC) founder Robert Tsao (曹興誠).
Although UMC has donated NT$120 million (US$3.65 million) to NTHU for the building of the “Electrical Information Hall” (later named the Liu Jiong Lang Hall), and NT$100 million to convert the Activity Center into the Junshan Concert Hall under Tsao’s auspices, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Weng Hsiao-ling (翁曉玲) accused Tsao of forfeiting a promise to donate NT$15 million.
Even though the payment was not in the form of his own personal check, Tsao maintained that NTHU did receive the money, as was also confirmed in 2011 by then-NTHU president Chen Lih-juann (陳力俊), and widely reported in the news media at the time. However, Chen now denies this. Either the young Chen or the old Chen was incorrect.
Tsao questioned how Chen could betray him so easily when UMC had helped NTHU so much, going so far as to ponder whether “the prestigious NTHU has degenerated into a united front for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)?” That is referring to his current prominent role in leading the recall movement against many KMT legislators who are considered CCP sympathizers and who have passed legislations against Taiwan’s interest.
The current NTHU president has refused to dispel the confusion, saying it was to protect the names and privacy of donors. That could be an important criterion and a fair policy under the normal circumstances. However, the current case goes beyond privacy, as it has become a public issue.
Given its academic excellence and leadership, NTHU needs to promote truth in every corner of society. Besides, the relevant information is readily available.
Weng has openly proclaimed that the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution is invalid and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has the right to take over Taiwan. She is in effect denying the legitimacy of her own status as a legislator granted under the ROC Constitution.
Given that the PRC does not even have a mandate to govern China, as the Chinese had never voted to give their approval, the mere suggestion to let an authoritarian country take over a democratic country makes her a laughingstock in the academic world.
Her illogical thinking and poor scholarship raises questions about her qualifications as an associate professor at NTHU.
China had undergone dynastic upheavals every few hundred years, causing war and poverty. The CCP, in power for less than 100 years, already had the Cultural Revolution with rioting Red Guards; the Tiananmen Square Massacre with at least 10,000 people killed; and White Guards during the COVID-19 pandemic causing an economic meltdown.
The unemployment rate among young people is now as high as 40 to 50 percent, with some left homeless. The vicious cycle of public suffering will continue if China’s political system remains authoritarian. Tsao, who recognizes the shortcomings of nationalism and stands up for democracy, the right choice for both Taiwan and China, should be commended and not insulted.
Weng has done enough damage to NTHU’s reputation. The university’s “ostrich” approach to the issue would cause further harm, as the disrespect to its most generous donor would erode the trust of alumni and others in pledging donations.
Moreover, if the president of the university could not tell the truth, how would the university teach students to tell the truth? NTHU owes the public the truth.
James J. Y. Hsu is a retired professor of theoretical physics.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
RSS