During the second election debate last Saturday, President Chen Shui-bian (
Certainly, Chen made numerous campaign promises during the 2000 election -- including stipends for senior citizens, farmers and fishermen. But Chen has made relatively few campaign promises this time. Being the incumbent, he knows the government's budget constraints and the difficulty of delivering on extravagant promises. Besides, his government's NT$500 billion national construction budget is still blocked by the opposition at the Legislative Yuan.
Lien has made a large number of promises -- an 18 percent preferential interest rate on deposits made by retired workers, a reduction of the military conscription period from the current 20 months to three months and an increase in the proportion of female legislators up to 30 percent, among others. Lien even boasted that Taiwan has the defensive capability to win the initial stage of a cross-strait war. Most of these policies are naive, while others are plain foolishness.
The government in the past granted a preferential 18 percent interest rate for servicemen, civil servants and teachers because these people had relatively low salaries. Over the decades, however, the policy created a heavy financial burden for the government and finally had to be terminated. Now only those who retired before 1995 still enjoy the special interest rate. Now, extending this largesse -- which in the past was only available to a small portion of society -- to retired workers will certainly cause a financial burden far beyond what the government coffers can endure. The policy is also unfair to other sectors of society. Apart from tax hikes, there is no way the government can pay for this perk. It is a typical pork-barrel policy, but the people have not been fooled. According to an opinion poll, 46 percent of respondents oppose the policy and 31 percent support it.
In the eyes of most Taiwanese men, serving in the military is a waste of time. Cutting it down to three months will create a serious national security burden. First of all, the purpose and usefulness of three months of military training needs to be clearly defined. Secondly, the entire strategic deployment, troop structure and personnel allocations need to be readjusted. Thirdly, large numbers of officers in command positions need to be laid off as the armed forces shrink. This will have a huge impact on the military and pose a major challenge for society as well.
China far outnumbers Taiwan in terms of weapons that can be used in pre-emptive strikes -- missiles, fighter jets and submarines. Qualitative superiority is all Taiwan has. Lien said Taiwan can win in the initial fight against China. We wonder what he bases his ideas on. China can, as Mao Zedong (毛澤東) said, sacrifice a tenth of its population. How many lives must Taiwan sacrifice in a first strike? Besides, Taiwan is gradually losing its qualitative superiority due to the opposition's obstruction of arms procurement budgets.
If Lien is truly concerned about Taiwan's security, he should tell his party's legislators to support the arms procurement budgets. He should also vote "yes" for both referendum questions on March 20.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS