Double standards have long been a part of Taiwanese politics. This is particularly apparent when it comes to criticism directed at the nation’s politicians. More often than not, the intensity — or lack thereof — of criticism depends on which side of the political spectrum a politician hails from.
The shooting incident involving one of former vice president Lien Chan’s (連戰) sons, Sean Lien (連勝文), vividly demonstrated just how ludicrous the double standards are for political figures from different camps.
The election-eve shooting at the rally of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) councilor candidate Chen Hung-yuan (陳鴻源) in Yonghe (永和), Taipei County, on Friday left one innocent bystander dead and Sean Lien injured. A bullet reportedly entered the left side of Sean Lien’s face and exited near his right temple.
The incident is reminiscent of the shooting on the eve of the 2004 presidential election, in which bullets grazed the stomach of then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and hit then-vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) in the knee.
Immediately after the shooting of the two Democratic Progressive Party candidates running for re-election, KMT politicians and pan-blue political commentators blasted it as a political ploy aimed at winning sympathy votes.
Asking how Chen survived and questioning why he was still able to walk after being hit, many suspected Chen of staging the shooting. The pan-blue camp painted any shooting-related comment by the DPP as an attempt to manipulate the public, with the KMT urging voters to use their ballots to punish the DPP. With the slogan “no truth, no president,” the KMT called on Chen to let the public see his wound, release his medical treatment records and allow opposition members to view his injuries to substantiate the claims that he was shot.
Now that the tables have been turned and the victim is a KMT member, the pan-blue response is totally different. Brushing aside claims that Friday’s shooting was staged, the pan-blue camp attributed it to “extreme good luck” that Sean Lien survived the gunshot and was able to flash a “V” sign for victory on his way to surgery. It also dismissed criticism that Lien Chan’s comments at Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin’s (郝龍斌) rally shortly after the shooting were politically motivated and described the comments as selfless and commendable. Moreover, when the pan-green camp called for Sean Lien to make public pictures of his injuries and X-rays, the pan-blue camp accused the opposition of lacking any shred of humanity and demanded respect for Sean Lien’s privacy.
The glaring absurdity of the double standards applies to both camps — the pan-blue camp called on voters to punish the DPP when the victim was a pan-green politician (Chen), and again called on voters to punish the DPP when the victim was a pan-blue politician (Sean Lien.) This bizarre pan-blue logic seems to suggest that whatever happens, it’s the DPP’s fault and that the DPP needs to be punished.
Some may argue that the shootings were different — Chen was a president seeking re-election and Sean Lien was not even running for election. However, Sean Lien’s injury garnered such intense media attention because of his influential family background; hence it is reasonable to compare the two.
Best wishes to Sean Lien for a speedy recovery. However, in view of the brazen double standards applied to Chen and Sean Lien, the credibility of the people now chiding the DPP seems suspect, especially when recalling how these same people dogged Chen after the shooting six years ago.
Taiwan is a small, humble place. There is no Eiffel Tower, no pyramids — no singular attraction that draws the world’s attention. If it makes headlines, it is because China wants to invade. Yet, those who find their way here by some twist of fate often fall in love. If you ask them why, some cite numbers showing it is one of the freest and safest countries in the world. Others talk about something harder to name: The quiet order of queues, the shared umbrellas for anyone caught in the rain, the way people stand so elderly riders can sit, the
Taiwan’s fall would be “a disaster for American interests,” US President Donald Trump’s nominee for undersecretary of defense for policy Elbridge Colby said at his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday last week, as he warned of the “dramatic deterioration of military balance” in the western Pacific. The Republic of China (Taiwan) is indeed facing a unique and acute threat from the Chinese Communist Party’s rising military adventurism, which is why Taiwan has been bolstering its defenses. As US Senator Tom Cotton rightly pointed out in the same hearing, “[although] Taiwan’s defense spending is still inadequate ... [it] has been trending upwards
After the coup in Burma in 2021, the country’s decades-long armed conflict escalated into a full-scale war. On one side was the Burmese army; large, well-equipped, and funded by China, supported with weapons, including airplanes and helicopters from China and Russia. On the other side were the pro-democracy forces, composed of countless small ethnic resistance armies. The military junta cut off electricity, phone and cell service, and the Internet in most of the country, leaving resistance forces isolated from the outside world and making it difficult for the various armies to coordinate with one another. Despite being severely outnumbered and
Small and medium enterprises make up the backbone of Taiwan’s economy, yet large corporations such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) play a crucial role in shaping its industrial structure, economic development and global standing. The company reported a record net profit of NT$374.68 billion (US$11.41 billion) for the fourth quarter last year, a 57 percent year-on-year increase, with revenue reaching NT$868.46 billion, a 39 percent increase. Taiwan’s GDP last year was about NT$24.62 trillion, according to the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, meaning TSMC’s quarterly revenue alone accounted for about 3.5 percent of Taiwan’s GDP last year, with the company’s
RSS