Amid allegations of security leaks over the indigenous submarine program, a legislator was accused of feeding sensitive information to a third nation, resulting in the arrests of engineers by overseas agents and action against a foreign contractor that helped build the first vessel.
Legislators are not the only people who work at the Legislative Yuan, so even with closed-door meetings, there is no guarantee that secrets would not leak.
Every information leak potentially poses a huge threat to national security, whether it is due to political interests, ineptitude or dereliction of duty.
Under normal circumstances, lawmakers would not pay attention to sensitive information from administrative institutions. Their role is to focus on a wide range of major policy issues related to their professional backgrounds.
Given this, the legislature’s Foreign and National Defense Committee should read through sensitive information provided by the Ministry of National Defense and pass on only what is necessary. That would help prevent national security risks due to a lack of discipline among lawmakers.
In advanced democracies, parliamentary systems center on standing committees, normally consisting of senior lawmakers with backgrounds related to a committee’s nature.
In Taiwan, the legislature is controlled by party caucuses, and it does not pay so much attention to the nature and aim of each committee.
The allegations against the Foreign and National Defense Committee lawmaker have been filed, with a prosecution possible.
The incident should be a warning to party leaders to think twice about whom they nominate as lawmakers. The capabilities and character of potential legislators should be carefully considered, especially the history and professional background of those who are put on committees.
Taiwan was given a “B” in the Government Defence Integrity Index compiled by Transparency International UK’s Transparency International Defence and Security program, which said that Taiwan’s “parliamentary oversight is well established and effective,” but added that its defense committee members are not professional enough and there is a risk of corruption.
However, this issue is out of the hands of the Ministry of National Defense — it can only be solved by political parties.
Tsao Yao-chun is a researcher with the Chinese Association of Public Affairs Management and an expert in evaluating international government integrity.
Translated by Rita Wang
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS