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.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS