The Taiwan Peace Foundation (
The museum is municipal property, operated under private management and municipal sponsorship.
The exhibits have helped me to understand the sorrow of the Taiwanese and the pain of the "Mainlanders" (Chinese immigrants who arrived after 1949 and their descendants) and sense the longing for peace and ethnic integration.
On weekends, thousands of people of different races, age and sex have watched folk culture performances in the small plaza in front of the 228 Memorial Park (
When the management contract was first signed, the Taipei government asked the museum not to seek profits by charging high fees, set the admission fee at NT$10 per person and required periodic free admission for Taipei residents and students.
The foundation had to finance the museum's operation with special government grants and private donations. Modeling its operation after museums in other advanced countries, the foundation recruited business talents who were good at fund raising and management specialists to serve as directors. Based on the success of the museum's operations, I cannot help but admire the director's accomplishment in running the museum as an enterprise.
I also admire the two mayors who allowed the private operation of the museum and the introduction of the idea of running a museum as a business enterprise. They helped build a sense of identity among the residents of greater Taipei.
Regretfully, before the management contract expired, the city's Bureau of Cultural Affairs violated both the contract's principles and the government procurement law.
Under the contract, the city government granted the foundation priority in renewing the contract. So why did the city fail to obtain a novation or propose a contract amendment in the six months after the government procurement law was passed?
Claiming that public bidding is required under the new procurement law, the city unilaterally changed the terms of the museum contract from the initial 3-years to 10-months. The move was an obvious breach of contract. It is no wonder that the foundation refused to accept the change and has even threatened to decline management.
On the other hand, if the foundation accepts the new contract, shouldn't the new term come under the procurement law? Doesn't this also make the city's under the table agreement with the foundation also illegal? Therefore, the city's move is contradictory.
The procurement law does not mandate public bidding for all purchasing by government agencies. Selective and restrictive bidding are other alternatives. Why doesn't the city government adopt one of these alternatives? Why does it try to force a contract renewal based on an authoritarian mentality?
It is truly beyond the understanding of legal and administrative logics. Perhaps politics is the real underlying reason?
The truly fascinating thing is that the Bureau of Cultural Affairs' Director-general, Lung Ying-tai (
Chen Pi-yuan is a freelance writer based in Taipei.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS