The “launch” on Tuesday of a new maritime route between Kaohsiung’s Cijin District (旗津) and Wenzhou, China, took the nation by surprise. The move constituted aggression to some and a danger to others, but turned out to be a hoax.
The creation of a new “small three links,” if it were true, would have been foolish. The idea that someone could simply create a maritime route to China without being subject to the Maritime and Port Bureau’s rules defies common sense, but apparently the firm that held the launch ceremony thought it was possible.
Establishment of maritime routes are subject to the bureau’s supervision, especially links with China, which must also conform to the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例).
The stunt was a direct challenge to the Cabinet of Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) — who since his first day in office has made painstaking efforts to keep African swine fever out of the nation — and a vastly irresponsible move given that the nation is just a week away from being removed from the World Organization for Animal Health’s list of foot-and-mouth disease-free zones where vaccination is practiced, meaning that Taiwan could start exporting pork again after 22 years.
Su appeared irate in a Facebook post: “No matter what political slogan you chant or what political gains you are after, do not mess with disease prevention.”
It was understandable that Su adopted a harsh tone. Anyone in his position would.
The trustworthiness of Kaohsiung Tourism Bureau Director Pan Heng-hsu (潘恆旭), who attended the launch ceremony, and Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) is to be questioned, given that they both knew ahead of time about the plan, but kept quiet about it until the ceremony.
It is not the first time that Han’s administration has kept apparent dealings with China secret. His surprise visit in March to China’s liaison office in Hong Kong, where he held a closed-door meeting with its director, created a scandal.
As government officials, Han and his bureaucrats have a responsibility to report their plans and policies to the public before they are implemented, not afterward.
An investigation by the Mainland Affairs Council found that the new maritime route was a “grand hoax aimed at creating the illusion that [Han’s slogan] ‘getting rich by shipping out goods and bringing in people’ was bearing fruit.”
The two vessels that Pan said had set sail for Wenzhou are still moored in Kaohsiung Harbor and the shipping company that was supposed to run the service ceased operations on June 12. Furthermore, no application to establish such a route has been filed with the Maritime and Port Bureau.
The affair reeks of deceit, recklessness in an area that affects national security, a lack of legal understanding, and nonchalance toward public health and the safety of the nation’s agricultural sector.
If Han’s administration continues to pursue these kinds of stunts and he continues his ad hoc management style, the questions over the nation’s fate under a possible Han presidency will continue.
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
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS