If we regard the way people take to the streets as a showcase of a nation's democracy, the recent protests against the WTO in Hong Kong have sent a message to the international community. Unfamiliar with international protesters, the Hong Kong riot police mobilized armored vehicles, tear gas and water cannons to disperse protesters trying to break through the barricades. Many protesters were arrested, unsettling many WTO delegates.
In recent years, many countries have attempted to resolve trade differences via the WTO. However, the media have also given extensive coverage to anti-globalization activists eager to voice their displeasure. Although tens of thousands of Hong Kongers protested proposed amendments to Article 23 of Hong Kong's Basic Law and the inability to elect their chief executive, that performance seemed rather passive in comparison -- chanting a few slogans before dispersing, rather like weekenders out for a stroll.
On the other hand, quite a few of the WTO protesters were well-trained and experienced. South Korea is a nation where people often take to the streets and its democracy was built upon such protests. Moreover, South Korea's student and labor unions are even more radical than its farmers. It is quite routine for them to protest against Japan, the US and their own government. In Hong Kong, South Korean farmers only made a token demonstration and called it quits when they felt their opinions had been heard, because they did not want to embarrass the police.
Taiwan's democracy was also won via street protests. And although protests in Taiwan tend to be noisy and rumbustious affairs, they always hold back from the point of bloody confrontation, for whoever incites direct violent conflict will not be tolerated by the media or the public. Therefore, Taiwanese protest groups in Hong Kong exercised restraint and did not look particularly active.
At the beginning of December, 200,000 people in Hong Kong marched to demand direct elections. Some warned that the demonstrators would be rioters, and seemed unaware that demonstrations are part of daily life in democratic countries. Last week's anti-WTO demonstrations were a revelation, and might even have altered the perception of democracy for many Hong Kongers. Democracy is about hearing the people's voice, and demonstrating is one way of making that voice heard. If people are the masters, then it is for them to directly elect their representatives and administrative chief. Reducing the number of appointed assembly members and calling it reform is not substantive and shows that the Hong Kong government still has a long way to go to achieve real democracy.
Although the WTO protest scenes were dramatic, this was certainly preferable to the recent deaths of protesters in Dongzhou in Guangdong Province at the hands of the Chinese police. But during the Hong Kong protests, the authorities arrested 14 people on charges of illegal assembly. This is quite ridiculous as thousands of people were involved. If these 14 were in fact guilty of rioting or assaulting a police officer, then of course charges should be pressed. That's how other democratic countries handle demonstrations. Otherwise, they should be released. How the authorities handle the aftermath of last week's protests and the subsequent treatment of the 14 prisoners looks likely to provide further insight on the prospects for further democratic development in the territory.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS