Recently the PFP has specialized in holding press conferences and crying foul on behalf of its chairman. To clear PFP Chairman James Soong (
With so many fingers pointing at its controversial leader, the PFP in its paranoia is presenting a conspiracy theory, essentially claiming that everyone wants to harm Soong. But is Soong really as innocent as the PFP would like us to believe?
The Chung Hsing Bills Finance scandal is a four-year-old case. On Wednesday, in response to a question from a member of the public, President Chen Shui-bian (
After the Taipei District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Soong over the case, lawyer Chuang Po-lin (
The Taiwan High Court Prosecutors' Office has now ordered the Taipei prosecutors' office to look into the reasons cited by Chuang in his appeal. The pan-blue lawmakers' accusations of political persecution are an overreaction.
On another front, the Central News Agency (CNA) recently made a mistake in translating a news report about former French foreign minister Roland Dumas' remarks on the Lafayette scandal. Dumas claimed that US$400 million in kickbacks had been transferred to the "general secretariat" of the then-ruling party -- ie, the KMT. But CNA mistranslated the phrase "general secretariat" as "secretary general" -- and in so doing directly implicated Soong.
The fact that the report turns out to be a mistranslation in no way actually proves Soong's innocence. After all, he was the KMT secretary-general at the time, the man who oversaw the party's secretariat. If the Lafayette kickbacks have anything to do with the KMT's secretariat, they almost certainly have to do with Soong. Using a mistranslated news report to "prove" Soong's innocence is an attempt to divert public attention and put blinkers on people's eyes.
This is nothing new for Soong. A few days ago, Soong argued during a press conference that, as director-general of the Government Information Office at the time, his role in the 1979 Kaohsiung Incident was simply to try to maintain the nation's image. What an understatement. During the trials for those arrested in the notorious incident, Soong publicly denounced them as "pro-Taiwan independence elements," and "those who walk the same path as the Communist bandits," and as "People who want to overthrow the government by force."
Soong's words defined the incident then and betray him now.
There's a frequently used phrase in local politics -- borrowed from Shakespeare -- "The queen's chastity cannot be questioned!" Soong is not only the chairman of the PFP but also the "queen" whom KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS