In March, Lu Chien-yi (盧倩儀), a research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institute of European and American Studies, and other academics caused a stir by forming an “anti-war” group, which called for an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine; an end to “American militarism and economic sanctions” against Russia; and for Taiwan to maintain positive and “equidistant” relations with the US and China, and focus on social welfare and climate change mitigation, rather than on military and war spending.
A few days ago, Public Television Service’s (PTS) Theme Night Show (公視主題之夜Show) hosted a debate between Lu and author Wang Hao (汪浩) on war issues and cross-strait relations. Lu asked people to consider NATO’s expansion and the West’s role in causing the Ukraine war.
The last thing that a small nation next to a large nation, which is a bad actor, should do is provoke its neighbor, she said.
Wang said that if Ukraine had not bolstered its military prowess and prepared for war after Russia annexed Crimea eight years ago, it would have been annihilated within a week.
Wang said that Taiwan, for its situation, should boost its national defense and seek support from the global community.
Lu said that she is not an expert on the topic, but would ask that China “leave Taiwan alone,” a flimsy solution based on wishful thinking that seemed ludicrous for a top researcher to put forward on such a high-profile show.
What is more disconcerting is that she touted her “objectivity” by tapping into ideals such as that war has only losers and small nations piling up weapons for defense is usually seen as a provocation by the other side.
By pointing out flaws in the democratic process, she is speaking up for aggressors such as Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). For her, opposing the US and opposing democracy are two sides of the same coin, while democracies serve the interests of “certain groups” rather than benefiting everyone.
To people in Lu’s camp, the US is the leader in a bloc that foments unrest and war to benefit weapons manufacturers.
While Taiwan is a democratic society that protects freedom of speech, there must be limits on powerful media entities amplifying bad ideas. Taxpayer-funded PTS has a responsibility to ensure it has an unequivocal stance on national security and national identity.
Media firms seek eye-catching content to boost viewership, so PTS made the right business decision by inviting Lu on to the show, given the response it drew from the public.
However, as a public entity, it must stick to its mission of serving the public, not vying for attention.
The anti-war narrative was condemned and largely sidelined in March, which should have shown that it was a minority view, but PTS put it back in the limelight and turned an unequivocal issue into a debate. Allowing an anti-democratic narrative airtime was negligence of its social responsibility. It was not embracing diversity, but sought to bolster its viewership.
As a public organization, PTS should ensure that its content is for the public good and based on universal values, and not be a tool to undermine democracy.
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