Democracy and Dirty Money in Taiwan
You have to love what’s happening in Taiwan. Yeah, I know the story is in Beijing with the Olympics and all that, but the former President of Taiwan, Chen Shui-bian, has just been banned from leaving the island and the Swiss are investigating a bank account that contains $20 million.
Chen, the first opposition candidate to become president of Taiwan, came into office promising to clean up what is known on that island as the culture of “hei qian” or dirty money. Hmmm.
On Sunday, prosecutors barred him from leaving the island pending an investigation into allegations of money laundering. On Saturday, prosecutors searched Chen Shui-bian’s residence in Taipei and took away boxes of documents.
Last week, Chen admitted that he broke the law by not fully disclosing campaign donations he had received, the AP reported. He later said his wife, Wu Shu-chen, had wired $20 million to Switzerland. Oh…the old, blame the wife defense.
Now this is the same guy who vowed time and again to protect Taiwan and never betray the island. This is the same guy who based his presidency on enraging China just enough to ensure his re-election. As president he also accused Taiwan’s other party, the Kuomintang, of plotting to abandon Taiwan’s interests and sell-out to Communist China. Chen has also resigned as leader of the Democratic Progressive Party.
The Taiwan story is remarkable, however, not just because it involves the fall of failed president but because it is happening at all. It underscores the fact that Taiwan’s democracy, while still plagued by corruption, is trying to keep it house clean. As such it’s good news for Taiwan and, who knows, perhaps good news for the many Chinese on mainland China who look to Taiwan and its political system with some hope and maybe a little admiration. Could this happen in China, too?
ANDREW:
The fact that a former head of state in Taiwan is going on trial in Taiwan and the trial is recieving full and unrestricted media coverage is a strong testament to the robustness of Taiwanese democracy and heralds Taiwan’s position of having the freest media in Asia. This is indicative of saliant differences between the political culture of Taiwan and the P.R.C. Namely that Taiwan has an autonomous legal system whereby no one is above the law while the P.R.C. lacks anything remotely resembling an autonomous legal system that is not a glorified extension of the P.R.C’s one party state. The brazen media coverage that this trial is recieving stands in stark contrast to the draconian state controlled media in the P.R.C whereby the media is strictly forbidden from saying anything remotely critical of the C.C.P.
Finally the phrase that Chen campaigned on a policy of enraging China to secure re-election is equally humerous as China gained maximum political exploitation from acting in an enraged manner as Chen did in enraging China. Remember that the C.C.P. validates is governing mandate by playing upon ultra-nationalism as shown by the way it pumps out dogmatic banal trite nationalistic slogans based on pseudo history. For example if the C.C.P wanted to act in a mature manner they would stop with trite cliches that bear no resemblance to reality. For example “Taiwan has been an inalieable part of China since ancient times” and that “splittist activity in Taiwan is restricted to an evil minority that contradicts the desire of the overwhelming majority of Taiwan compatriots who seek to be reunited with the Chinese motherland”
AUGUST 19, 2008 12:36 AM |
LIVING IN TAIWAN:
I relocated here a year ago from India and am surprised at the level of political discourse, the transparency in investigating government failures and the scathing commentary that op-ed pieces carry of the govt. If the mainland wants to look at what to aspire to, look no further. Taiwan can teach a lesson in democracy and its better side to many, including my unfortunate country (but that’s another, VERY long story)…
PS – good you covered the island, its actually an amazing place.
AUGUST 19, 2008 12:26 AM |
TZU KUNG:
Several periods in mainland China’s history have developed in which corruption became an end unto itself. The late Manchu dynasty through 1900 is a good example. But it is a ‘culture’ of corruption that differentiates a democracy from a totalitarian system. In a democracy like Taiwan, there are many instances of corruption without it being a ‘culture’ where positions in the government are purchased for the express purpose of acquiring clan or family wealth by bestowing purchasable ‘favors’ to others. In a Taiwanese, Philippine, Korean or Japanese democracy, the mere existence of a public denunciation press might be enough to prevent the corruption culture, even if much exists. The PRC, Vietnamese and Myanmar governments have the corrupt culture disease and it is strong enough to be harmful to so many ‘paying clients’.
Without a free mass communication method, the ‘culture’ would be extremely difficult to remove. Believing that a position of power and influence is a possession of one’s clan is as old as the Chin Dynasty and the Pharaohs of Egypt . The American Constitution checks and balances goes a ways to moving away from the diseased cultures of the past, but perhaps still not enough.
AUGUST 19, 2008 12:08 AM | by ?