On Tuesday, DPP Legislator Cheng Kuo-chung (鄭國忠) made an alarming revelation during an interpellation in the Legislative Yuan -- as many as 17 media in Taiwan are suspected of receiving funding from China. This is indeed a very sticky problem for the government. While intangible Chinese infiltration of this sort is probably more lethal for Taiwan in the long run than the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic, the government has even fewer means available to combat this emerging "epidemic" within the media.
The undesirability, to say the least, of having media financed with Chinese capital goes without saying. Taiwanese society is sorely lacking in terms of Taiwan-centered perception as it is. After the end of the martial law era, "nativized consciousness" at last began to emerge only in the last few years. Pro-unification media have therefore been having an extremely difficulty time, since their China-centered views appeal only to a shrinking minority. In due course, if market competition is allowed to do its business, their market share would be reduced to a miniscule piece of the pie.
In a critical moment like this, the infusion of Chinese capital is like an oasis in the desert. For obvious reasons, media that are pro-independence or are deemed as having nativized stances are not going to be on Beijing's Santa Clause list of good kids. Media backed by Chinese capital will be able to stay in the market and perhaps even outlast those on the other side of the political spectrum. Even more importantly, they will be able to continue to influence and shape public views and perceptions. All this will be highly counterproductive to the newly blossoming "nativized consciousness."
Unfortunately, the government seems to have its hands tied with respect to this problem. Frankly speaking, there is very little it can do to a problem with very serious consequences. While according to the Statute Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan and Mainland Areas (
The government additionally faces two highly sensitive dilemmas in dealing with this difficult situation. It must avoid any allegations or suspicions of trampling on the "freedom of the press" and the "freedom to do business." Only a few days ago, the Government Information Office incited an uproar with its plan to contract an independent research group to study the "business management" of the media industry. Members of the media accused the government of trying to impose not only censorship but also force them to divulge sensitive and confidential business data.
But in the foreseeable future this will be only the tip of an iceberg of infiltrations by Chinese concerns. If this can happen in the media industry, surely it is not a far stretch to say China must hold interests in other industries of Taiwan as well.
Under normal circumstances, the introduction of foreign capital would of course be a good reason to jump for joy, but China has never even bothered to hide its ambition and its hostility toward Taiwan.
Technicians are busily working in labs to track the coronavirus that causes SARS and they need microscopes to see the hidden killer. Under the circumstances, just about the only thing the government can do is get its own microscopes: a better mechanism to trace sources of foreign capital and more funding transparency from the media industry.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS