Taipei First Girls’ High School Chinese literature teacher Alice Ou (區桂芝) has been put under the spotlight again for an interview with China Central Television (CCTV).
In her interview with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-run station, Ou reportedly said that President William Lai (賴清德) should not call China an external hostile force because she still wanted to visit her mother and relatives in China. She questioned whether defining China as an external hostile force would imply that she should view her mother as an enemy.
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister and spokesman Liang Wen-chieh (梁文傑), when asked if Ou’s interview constituted collusion, on Thursday said that it was “really inappropriate” for Ou to be interviewed by CCTV, and that “she knows the reason why CCTV wanted to interview her. It is because she would say what they wanted to hear.”
There has been extensive discussion over Ou’s remarks. Many questioned if she is too pro-China, and whether it would influence Taiwanese society and the education sector.
Her comments demonstrated that she interprets cross-strait affairs sentimentally, simplifying the issue as a family relationship. What she said downplays the complexity of cross-strait relations. What China has been doing to Taiwan — be they political, economic or military threats — has been deeply worrying and disturbing to Taiwanese.
Lai’s statement acknowledged that Taiwan has to take preventive measures when facing challenges brought by China. Ou’s remark, which framed the issue as a family relationship, ignored the interests of Taiwanese society as a whole and the country’s national security.
Another matter is whether her comments contravened the Teachers’ Act (教師法). Educators shoulder responsibilities of knowledge transfer and instilling values in students. They should be cautious and objective when they publicly express their opinions. They should also avoid political controversies.
Would a teacher who has long been publicly supporting China and criticizing the Taiwanese government negatively affect students? A teacher has a duty not only to demonstrate academic achievements, but also good conduct and a sense of responsibility.
Although Ou is entitled to freedom of speech, are her comments ethical and do they comply with the regulations in the education sector? Should the education authorities step in to provide guidance and censor her comments?
The controversies Ou’s comments have sparked are not merely about personal viewpoints. It is about Taiwan’s social values and educators’ duties. When teachers express their opinions on political issues, they should carefully consider how they would affect students and society.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has said China has not given up on “unifying” with Taiwan by force. Why has Ou not criticized Xi’s intention?
Everyone is entitled to have their own political stance. Ou, keeping the halo of teaching at the Taipei First Girls’ High School, has been criticizing her own country in interviews with the media. Yet she turns a blind eye to China’s threatening gestures and malicious acts against Taiwan.
Ou, who is keen on classic works of Chinese literature, should read Confucius’ (孔子) Analects (論語) again.
Zeng Shen (曾參), the ancient Chinese philosopher and disciple of Confucius, said: “I examine myself daily on three points.” Has Ou been able to do so?
Lin Cheng-wu is a junior-high school teacher.
Translated by Fion Khan
Two weeks ago, Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) raised hackles in Taiwan by posting to her 2.6 million Instagram followers that she was visiting “Taipei, China.” Yeoh’s post continues a long-standing trend of Chinese propaganda that spreads disinformation about Taiwan’s political status and geography, aimed at deceiving the world into supporting its illegitimate claims to Taiwan, which is not and has never been part of China. Taiwan must respond to this blatant act of cognitive warfare. Failure to respond merely cedes ground to China to continue its efforts to conquer Taiwan in the global consciousness to justify an invasion. Taiwan’s government
This month’s news that Taiwan ranks as Asia’s happiest place according to this year’s World Happiness Report deserves both celebration and reflection. Moving up from 31st to 27th globally and surpassing Singapore as Asia’s happiness leader is gratifying, but the true significance lies deeper than these statistics. As a society at the crossroads of Eastern tradition and Western influence, Taiwan embodies a distinctive approach to happiness worth examining more closely. The report highlights Taiwan’s exceptional habit of sharing meals — 10.1 shared meals out of 14 weekly opportunities, ranking eighth globally. This practice is not merely about food, but represents something more
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
RSS