Taiwanese athletes earned two gold and five bronze medals at the Paris Olympic Games, a result that brought honor to people across the country. These accomplishments are the result of eight years of effort by the government under the Democratic Progressive Party to develop the National Sports Training Center and allocate resources to sports science.
To build upon the foundation of these outstanding Olympic achievements, the government would fulfill a plan proposed last year by President William Lai (賴清德) to establish a ministry for sports development, Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) recently announced.
This moment, right after the conclusion of the Olympic Games, when Taiwanese all over are showing great respect for sports, is the perfect time to make this announcement.
Based on the blueprint of Lai’s policy, it is clear that he hopes to commercialize, academicize and invigorate sports in Taiwan.
In the past, sports associations had been denounced for being controlled by small, tight-knit circles. To get government subsidies to organize domestic competitions, they used their connections and privileges to suppress and exclude “noncore” athletes.
That type of closed environment where a bunch of big shots with no real achievements of their own speak the loudest is detrimental to the introduction of new training techniques, equipment and facilities.
It is similarly harmful to Taiwan’s chances of winning international competitions.
However, the simple structure of government aid, training and athletes is not enough to produce the innovation and development of a vigorous sports environment.
Taiwan also needs spectators, sports enthusiasts, equipment manufacturers, research institutions, corporate sponsors, stadiums, broadcasters, clubs and more. Only then can the commerce side of sports truly grow, limiting the proliferation of detrimental tight-knit circles and allowing Taiwanese athletics to progress.
At the same time, the gold standard for national athletic prowess does not merely lie in Olympic medals. Just as Lai said, what is more important is finding a way for athletes to transition to a new phase of their lives after the peak of their career.
How can their valuable experience be turned into inheritable capital? These are important issues to consider in the field of sports.
If a comprehensive division can be developed under the Executive Yuan, these concerns must be considered, and with discussion often comes questions. So why not leave them to the Sports Administration under the Ministry of Education?
With the Ministry of Education acting as the guiding body, schools would serve as the core focus of sports policy and their implementation. Several local governments have already established sports departments.
Now that the central government is to establish its own independent ministry for sports development, the planning and management of athletic facilities and competitions, along with the promotion of amateur sports, would create a ripple effect starting from the center and branching out to the rest of the country.
Sports can enhance a nation’s moral character, promote public health and develop societal virtues. We look forward to the establishment of the ministry for sports development, as it would allow Taiwan to cultivate a better society.
Chen Bang-an is deputy executive director of the Democratic Progressive Party’s Taichung branch.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS