The Wild Strawberry Student Movement, it seems, has had enough of the government beating around the bush. On Sunday, it will attempt to bring the debate over the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) to a head by rallying about 1,000 people to demonstrate without a police permit.
As the marchers head down Ketagalan Boulevard to the Presidential Office, the government and police will be forced to come down against a sensible exercise in civil disobedience or send the message that demonstrating without a permit will be tolerated. The organizers have advertised well in advance that they intend to break the law, which is nothing more than a relic of the Martial Law era and a blemish on Taiwan’s democracy that should have been amended long ago.
The government could be tempted to respond. After all, doing so would only require pointing to the law books and claiming that it is bound to abide by them.
But the Wild Strawberries have an advantage. They have won support and sympathy with their weeks-long show of determination by demonstrating peacefully at Liberty Square in front of National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall since the visit of Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林). They have also sent a message that members of a younger generation often labeled as apathetic and spoiled — the “strawberry generation” — have passionate opinions about the course their country is taking.
The students have, furthermore, made efforts to be non-partisan. Their message is that anyone who values the nation’s democracy, regardless of political affiliation, should not stand for the assembly law as it exists today. They have sent invitations for their activities to politicians across party lines and have promised not to allow any symbols of political affiliation at this weekend’s demonstration.
All of this means that the government and police should think twice before attempting to enforce the assembly law on Sunday, at a time when the reputation of both is under scrutiny.
The integrity of the police has been under attack since its questionable response to demonstrations during Chen’s visit, and overzealous police chiefs have since been promoted despite employing heavy-handed measures.
At the same time, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration is having a difficult time defending itself against allegations that range from influencing prosecutors to intimidating the media.
On Sunday, the Judicial Reform Foundation leveled criticism at prosecutors for leaking information to the press, possibly to influence public opinion on certain cases. The foundation also accused prosecutors of singling out pan-green figures for arbitrary detention in violation of their rights. Just one day later came a scathing rebuttal from foreign academics to Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng’s (王清峰) defense of the prosecutors’ actions.
Much to the chagrin of the Ma administration, the doubt cast on its dedication to human rights is not melting away. These questions have even stolen thunder from the money-laundering allegations against the former first family. This, at a time when the government hoped to score sorely needed points as details of the case emerge.
If the Ma administration is concerned about the allegations against its integrity, it should neither ask police to enforce the objectionable elements of the assembly law on Sunday nor turn a blind eye to the rally. Instead, it should recognize the significance of the Wild Strawberries’ gesture and show its dedication through an expeditious overhaul of the assembly law.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS