Amid the ongoing wrangle between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) over the price of persimmons and other fruits, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) on Tuesday visited a traditional market in Greater Taichung to demonstrate his concern about the issue.
At the market, Ma bought about 5,000kg of persimmons as a gesture of support for the farmers, as well as to counter the DPP’s claim that fruit prices have plummeted.
While the move was certainly designed to show Ma’s concern and support for fruit farmers, a closer look might lead one to doubt the sincerity of his actions.
Ma footed the bill not from his own pocket, but from the president’s state affairs fund. While some might argue that it is the thought that counts and that there is nothing wrong with using the fund — which Ma can use at his discretion — to pay for the purchase, many others might ask whether withdrawing the money from the fund truly shows Ma cares about the farmers.
If he did care, wouldn’t he set a better example and win more respect from the public by purchasing his pile of persimmons with his own money, rather than paying with taxpayer funds?
That he did not dip into his own pocket leaves many unconvinced that Ma genuinely cares about the plight of farmers: His thoughtful gesture was, after all, made at the expense of the taxpayer.
And is it at all possible for Ma to comprehend the big picture and the seriousness of the situation that the farmers are facing through a mere visit to a traditional market?
If Ma wanted to find out how he could help the farmers, he would visit farms and see firsthand the damage that has been caused to crops by unusually heavy rains. Perhaps then he might grasp something of the pain being experienced by farmers who have had to watch their months of hard work, sweat and tears go down the drain.
Aside from the seeming lack of sincerity, Ma’s extravagant persimmon purchase was also in itself contradictory.
Ma and the Council of Agriculture have in the past few days slammed the DPP over its claims about persimmon prices and argued that fruit prices have not dropped as low as the DPP has said.
However, if persimmons were selling at as reasonable a price as the KMT government says, why the need for the president to sponsor the purchase in the first place?
Ma has become fond of saying: “I’m not selling out Taiwan; what I sold was local fruit.” However, it appears that what he is actually selling out is the nation’s fruit farmers.
Amid the rhetoric of the fruit-price wars, the KMT — to show it stands on the side of the fruit farmers — yesterday placed an advertisement in several local newspapers trumpeting Taiwan’s fruits as being first-class.
Indeed they are. That’s how the nation earned the honor of being called the “kingdom of fruit.”
However, what are Taiwanese fruit farmers supposed to do in the face of an incompetent government whose concern for the issue — last-minute advertising and empty gestures of buying up persimmons — is evidently only skin deep?
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent