Taiwan-Japan tensions over the Diaoyutai islets and cross-strait negotiations have helped to obscure the tedious controversy over green cards, foreign citizenship and residence that has been impacting on government officials and elected representatives.
This obscuring process is welcome, if only because the silliness of it all has been made more apparent.
For decades now Taiwan’s government — regardless of the party in power — has been trying to sell itself as a potential Asia-Pacific hub for various services or industries. This is a natural direction to take, though the execution has frequently failed to live up to the impressiveness of the sales pitch.
Being a hub for anything requires an understanding of how the rest of the world works, as well as the ability to come to administrative terms with professional mobility and the complexity of global markets.
It is difficult to detect any of these positive elements in the argument over officials who allegedly possess foreign residency or work permits.
The Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) presidential candidate, Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), started this embarrassing ball rolling with a poorly thought out — indeed, self-destructive — campaign strategy that sought to tarnish President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The thesis was that a presidential candidate who had or might still have a US green card could not fulfill the functions required of him by the Constitution.
It was a ridiculous argument, though this in itself did not preclude its effectiveness as a political weapon. Unfortunately for the DPP, voters rejected Hsieh’s attempts to label Ma as unpatriotic and Hsieh was left looking foolish after failing to learn from his lazy, unsuccessful run for Taipei mayor.
The irony now is that this same argument has been revitalized in a formal witch hunt — with bipartisan support — for officials and politicians who took up residency or employment in other countries before returning to Taiwan to work in the government or as an elected representative.
The latest person to be dragged through the mud is National Security Council Secretary-General Su Chi (蘇起). A DPP legislator yesterday accused Su of retaining a valid green card, though the Presidential Office was quick to respond by saying the card ceased to be valid in the late 1980s.
But the biggest catches in this executive review have been officials who hold current — and possibly conflicting — status as dual nationals, the kind of people that Next Magazine delights in “exposing.” One of those is KMT Legislator Diane Lee (李慶安), who has been accused of having US citizenship, and therefore who would have broken the law by being elected to the legislature. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is apparently continuing a probe into her status.
But for the most part, this drama goes to show that Taiwanese political circles are capable of bipartisan expressions of muddle-headed nationalism even when it is manifestly hypocritical and blind to the reality of professional and public life.
Most of the people who have been caught up in this drama broke no law and have exhibited no behavior in this context that suggests their allegiance to the nation was ever under question.
Changes to regulations inspired by this witch hunt have met a symbolic imperative and have nothing to do with good governance, as subsequent appeals for exemptions in the field of economics, for example, demonstrate all too clearly.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS