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.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS