Students from National Taiwan University, National Chengchi University, Fu Jen Catholic University and other schools recently began to take part in the post-election protests led by the pan-blue camp. Claiming to be free of political bias, more than a dozen of these students began a sit-in and hunger strike last Friday at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial.
The hunger strikers have made five proposals. First, they want President Chen Shui-bian (
The students, however, seem to have no idea of how the government works -- or much knowledge of recent political history. The president is in a position of power, but he is not all-powerful.
For example, take the students' appeal for a Cabinet made up of the party with a legislative majority. Such a significant change to the government system would require a fundamental revision of the Constitution. Such power lies in the hands of the legislature, not the president. Since it is the pan-blue camp that claims a legislative majority, the students should be making this demand to Lien and Soong, not Chen.
As for forming a coalition government, Chen attempted to do that in his first term. He appointed the KMT's Tang Fei (
The students appear to be, excuse the phrase, jumping the gun in their demand for a commission to investigate the March 19 shooting. World-renowned forensics expert Henry Lee (
As for their claims to be politically neutral, at least three of the students leading the hunger strike are members of either the KMT or the PFP. Some of them have said that they would withdraw from their parties right away to show their neutrality. But their actions have understandably raised suspicions about whether one or more political parties are behind the students' protest, and has damaged the credibility of the protesters.
The focus of the students' complaints is largely Chen, yet much of what they ask for is beyond the reach of his authority. Therefore, as they continue their hunger strike, one would hope they could come up with more feasible appeals and come clean about their personal political stances. Trying to hide their political connections does a great disservice to their ambitions. It is commendable that university students want to debate government structure and policy -- but they should not allow themselves to become pawns in political power struggles.
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS