Although the legislature resumed operations yesterday following a series of boycotts orchestrated by the pan-blue camp, the Procedure Committee continues to block the US arms procurement bill and the nomination of Control Yuan members. However, the draft of the organic law governing the proposed National Communications Commission (NCC) has been scheduled for deliberation in the next full meeting of the legislature.
This does not imply that the NCC bill has greater weight than the arms bill or the approval of Control Yuan nominations. Rather, it is because pan-blue interests are closely linked to the establishment of the NCC. The pan-blue camp is eager to abolish the Government Information Office (GIO) and take into their own hands supervisory authority over the media.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) long kept a tight rein on Taiwanese media. Media was the tool they employed to broadcast their ideology and manipulate public opinion. It was not until near the end of its rule over Taiwan that the KMT was willing to relinquish its hold on the media. Even now, the party has enormous influence over a large number of media outlets, but supervisory authority over the media is vested in the GIO.
In July, the GIO's decision to reject the license renewal of seven cable TV channels sent shock waves through media circles as well as the opposition parties. The GIO put several other media outlets on a three-month probation, insisting that they raise standards. If the GIO follows through with strict inspections at the end of this period, many stations may find it impossible to survive. They may even be compelled to switch their political allegiance. This is why the GIO has become "public enemy No. 1" to the opposition parties.
The organic law governing the NCC is a bill the government has prioritized. It is a major part of the government's media reform plans, and is also important for reforming the executive as a whole. There is nothing wrong with the pan-blue camp's attempt to review the NCC bill separately, but it has disrupted the comprehensive plan of executive reform. For all these reasons, the NCC bill has become highly politically charged.
In the Executive Yuan's proposed bill, all NCC members would be nominated by the Executive Yuan and appointed by the president. This follows the model for most important civil appointments. But the opposition is unwilling to allow a DPP premier to nominate and a DPP president to appoint NCC members, as this would put the NCC under pan-green control. They have therefore demanded that appointments be made proportionally by party, based on the number of legislative seats held. As the opposition has the majority in the legislature, under this system they would also have a majority on the NCC, and the body would come under its control.
The NCC bill is stuck on the horns of a dilemma. If the bill goes nowhere, much-needed media reform will be delayed. But if it is revised along the lines proposed by the opposition, with the aim of pushing the bill through the legislature, then the NCC will have been sacrificed on the altar of political compromise. The NCC was intended as a professional and independent body, but if the opposition's version of the bill goes through, it will become nothing more than yet another political battleground. The power struggle between the government and opposition will extend from the NCC to all media, and from the media to society at large, engulfing the nation.
Under the government's proposed bill, the premier is required to consider the professionalism and neutrality of NCC appointments. But the opposition may well find this version unacceptable for political reasons and reject it. So be it. If we consider all factors, it is probably better to allow this bill to run aground than to compromise the political neutrality of the proposed NCC.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of