H5N2 and politics
Recent issues involving ractopamine, US beef, lean-meat additives and now H5N2 in chickens and a possible cover-up point to a problem at the heart of Taiwanese society: promotion of economic interests over the safety of the general public by a leadership and government to secure its political ambitions.
It is interesting that ractopamine and H5N2 are not being understood predominantly in a political context since the issues seem to have developed during an election campaign.
It is eerily similar to how the Chinese milk scandal was pushed aside during an important event — the 2008 Beijing Olympics. For Taiwan, it was the Jan. 14 elections.
The latest outbreak of H5N2 seems to have started in December last year. This was at the moment the campaign was revving up and the notorious Yu Chang Biologics case emerged.
If the outbreak had been made public during the election, it could have turned the “soft capital” of Democratic Progressive Party presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) socially-oriented pledges into hard capital, as they would have been potentially transformed into a narrative of a threat to families.
When reading about academics protesting against ractopamine, it makes one wonder why they have not been directing this kind of energy at the behavior of the Council of Agriculture over the H5N2 issue — not just this specific Cabinet agency, or simply only this level of government. Rather, they should be directing their energy toward how the media orientates itself and engages other representational entities across Taiwanese society to make real change.
The reality is that such an ambitious move would likely threaten their access to resources, if not their position within universities — as the universities know all too well they must toe the political line or risk censure. The logical outcome is to attack an easy external threat. It is easy as it has been replicated in other countries and similar issues have also had a history in Taiwan.
If you remember, during the election, other ministries sought to preserve and expand the political capital of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration. Former Council for Economic Planning and Development minister Christina Liu (劉憶如) is now infamous for implicating Tsai using inaccurate documentation during the election campaign. It all started when the Legislative Yuan voted to open sealed documents, the contents of which they, curiously, had no idea about.
The information was presented by Liu and later she simply brushed aside inaccuracies by saying her office had too few resources for the amount of data involved — yet she was willing to rush out a conclusion before accessing all the information.
This week, we find another government body has failed to fulfill its bureaucratic responsibilities.
Or has it? The H5N2 issue did not come up during the election.
This is part of a historical pattern found within the Taiwanese government. A legacy of political ambition and goals reflected in the bureaucracy. Political goals are pushed downward, shaping behavior in a way that reinforces the ambitions of leaders in power, rather than bureaucratic competency being the primary goal.
It is very rare for a department within the government to offer direction to the political elite. Take Academia Sinica and its relocation to Taiwan — its most influential department was Chinese literature when it was re-established, which is a curious thing for a country of new immigrants needing to make a new life for themselves. The reason? The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) leadership’s ideological message was that it was the rightful protector of Chinese history and culture, in combating the evils of the Chinese Communist Party and the People’s Liberation Army.
The next curious event was the shift to science, technology and research and development, after messages from the leadership previously ignored such aspects. The reason? China had become a nuclear power, outstripping the KMT on the global stage. This cemented what would become part of former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger’s legacy. The Republic of China needed to reconceptualize its message as the “better” China, through technology and industry. What has happened over the past few months has everything to do with these major events in Taiwan’s modern history — the establishment of political corporatism.
One should not forget that the post-secondary system is also very much part of the bureaucratic apparatus in Taiwan. It is very different from say Europe or North America, as the top-down pressure is quite visible and pronounced, when political messages translate into rapid implementation at the university level, leading to a cascading effect on academic departments.
These are not spaces where apolitical, abstract or contentious ideas can be generated and thrive. Rather they are spaces where political goals and ambitions are to be promoted, pushing aside anything that does not serve political ambition. The purpose of these academic offices, which academics are all too familiar with — the generation of ideas — are secondary.
The H5N2 issue is directly linked to the ractopamine issue and the political ambitions of those holding office, and has very little to do with ensuring Taiwanese are safe.
Philippe McKay
Pingtung
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS