How a government handles controversies — especially ones that touch upon issues as delicate as ethnic equality — not only demonstrates its sincerity in resolving problems but also its core values. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government’s handling of the uproar surrounding former Government Information Office (GIO) official Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英) is therefore regrettable.
More than two weeks have elapsed since allegations first made headlines that the acting director of the information division at the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Toronto had written a series of articles demeaning Taiwan and Taiwanese under the pseudonym Fan Lan-chin (范蘭欽).
After repeated denials that he was Fan, Kuo on Monday owned up to writing the articles. With hateful and derogatory language, Kuo denied the scale of the 228 Incident and advocated ethnic cleansing.
Article 1, Clause 1 of the the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, passed by the UN in 1965, says: “The term ‘racial discrimination’ shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.”
In view of the fact that these inflammatory articles so clearly constitute discrimination against one or more ethnic groups and attempt to distort history, it is painful that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) took so long to condemn them.
It is even more appalling, however, that no word of apology has been offered by a high-ranking member of the government over the fascist opinions espoused by a GIO official.
Article 7 of the Constitution says that “all people of the Republic of China are equal before the law regardless of gender, religion, race, social status or political affiliation.” Article 114 of the Criminal Code says that any government official who violates duties related to foreign affairs with the result of “incurring harm to the Republic of China” shall be sentenced to at least seven years in prison.
Kuo was given two demerits by the GIO on Monday and relieved of his civil servant status not because of what he had written, but because his “inconsistent” explanations to the GIO on whether he was the author and a series of remarks he made to the media constituted “defiance of the government.”
Although Ma and Liu have since condemned Kuo’s writings as “unquestionably extreme and discriminatory,” the lack of a formal apology from the government could fuel suspicion that it is not particularly upset by the revelation that this hate speech was penned by a GIO official.
Ma and his administration can help Taiwan overcome the anger surrounding the Kuo-Fan incident by demonstrating their dedication to ethnic equality and harmony. Rather than stopping at condemning Kuo’s articles, they should drive the message home with an apology on behalf of the government.
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