In the run-up to last month’s presidential and legislative elections, the old Peter Paul and Mary folksong from the 1960s kept ringing in my ears: Where Have All the Flowers Gone?
Of course, as this is related to Taiwan, I was thinking of the Sunflowers, the generation of young people led by student leaders Lin Fei-fan (林飛帆) and Chen Wei-ting (陳為廷) who brought about a major change in Taiwan’s political system when they organized the peaceful occupation of the Legislative Yuan in 2014, which helped clear the path for President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) momentous victory in 2016.
The Sunflowers displayed a clear vision for what they wanted Taiwan’s democracy to be, and took action to help bring that about. In a sense, they were true descendants of the earlier Wild Strawberry movement of 2008 and the Wild Mountain Lily movement of 1990-1991, which each in their own way were decisive influences at particular points along Taiwan’s road to democracy.
GENERATIONAL CHANGE
In contrast to that history of young people playing a role in Taiwan’s democracy, the younger generation in last month’s elections appeared to be very self-centered, caring more about their own well-being than about the overall direction of the country.
It was reported that many young people these days take Taiwan’s freedom and democracy for granted, and in the campaign, were primarily focused on issues directly affecting their livelihoods, such as affordable housing and entry-level wages.
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) played on these sentiments cunningly, and while he lost the presidential race, his party won eight seats in the Legislative Yuan and is now playing a “kingmaker” role.
The question is whether Ko will play his role wisely and constructively. The first indications are not very positive. In the elections for legislative speaker on Thursday last week, the TPP withheld its support for the previous speaker, You Si-kun (游錫?), and thus gave the speakership to the KMT’s erratic Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), who is expected to follow a very obstructive and confrontational line in the legislature.
HAN KUO-YU FACTOR
Under these circumstances, very little attention is expected to be paid to the issues that young people care about, such as affordable housing, entry-level wages or clean government.
Instead, Han is likely to wage a protracted battle for power and influence that will set back Taiwan’s democracy, damage its image in the free and democratic world, and provide openings to the Chinese Communist regime in Beijing to further divide Taiwanese society.
DEFENDING DEMOCRACY
The new generation of young people in Taiwan must realize that one cannot take the country’s freedoms and democracy for granted. The older generation in Taiwan fought hard to attain the vibrant democracy that Taiwanese enjoy today.
It is up to this generation of young people to work hard to preserve, cherish and defend democracy against those forces — from within Taiwan and outside it — determined to undermine and ultimately eradicate it.
Hong Kong and Xinjiang are good examples of places where freedom-loving people lost their freedoms pretty quickly.
Let us not let that happen to Taiwan.
Gerrit van der Wees is a former Dutch diplomat who teaches Taiwan history and US relations with East Asia at George Mason University, and previously taught at the George Washington University Elliott School for International Affairs in Washington.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS