Selling out
farmers a seed at a time
Friday, Jun 19, 2009, Page 8
News that former minister of agriculture Paul Sun (孫明賢) has taken up a
consulting position with a Chinese government agricultural enterprise caused a
furor this week.
In accepting a three-year job at the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture-funded
Taiwan Agricultural Entrepreneurship Garden, Sun became the latest in a long
line of former officials to spark conflict of interest concerns.
A bigger concern, however, was that Sun’s appointment would lead to valuable
domestic agricultural technology and know-how being leaked to farmers in China.
Sun is also the chairman of the Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center,
an institute partly funded by the government and headquartered in Shanhua (善化),
Tainan County, that develops new seed strains and agricultural technology.
It is no secret that China has long coveted access to Taiwan’s advanced
agricultural technology, an aim that Association for Relations Across the Taiwan
Strait Deputy Chairman Zheng Lizhong (鄭立中) elaborated on during a visit this
week to farmers in Tainan.
“China’s government attaches great importance to its agricultural development,”
Zheng was quoted as saying in news reports, adding that Tainan County should
capitalize on its competitive edge in the high-quality subtropical fruit sector
to cooperate with China and “strengthen the division of labor across the Taiwan
Strait” — a sentence that roughly translates as “give us your agricultural
secrets.”
Academics and politicians have repeatedly warned of the grim future facing
Taiwan’s farmers should Chinese farmers gain access to their advanced
techniques.
Taiwan’s agriculture sector remains far ahead of its Chinese counterpart and
this advantage helps farmers increase their income by promoting export of their
high-quality produce to countries such as Japan and Australia.
But once Chinese farmers gain access to this know-how, that competitive
advantage will be lost and China’s much larger agricultural sector will be able
to take advantage of cheaper labor to flood regional markets with cheaper
produce of a similar quality.
This could deliver a lethal blow to many of Taiwan’s small-scale farmers already
struggling to cope with increased foreign imports following accession to the WTO.
China has already shown itself to be disrespectful toward intellectual property
laws, and there are numerous cases of Taiwanese investors complaining about
Chinese partners reproducing their seed strains without paying royalties.
Faced with these questions, Sun defended himself by saying: “We shouldn’t see
agricultural technology as sensitive material. Instead, it should be a public
asset. China has large stretches of land and good plant diversity, and can be
seen as an extension of Taiwan’s farmlands.”
That may be the case for larger, wealthier farmers who can afford to invest in
China, but it is small comfort for the thousands of small-scale farmers who eke
out a living from small plots of land.
Aiding Taiwan’s allies with agricultural know-how to help them alleviate poverty
and malnutrition is one thing, but doing the same with China in the face of its
overarching desire to annex Taiwan is tantamount to agricultural ruin.
While Taiwan cannot afford to ignore its giant neighbor, presenting officials
like Sun with the opportunity to sacrifice the goose that lays the golden egg in
the name of improved relations is unforgivable.
Ignoring
traditional culture
Friday, Jun 19, 2009,
Page 8
I have to say that, while your competition’s bold all-caps headlines are eye
catching, I’ve remained loyal to the Taipei Times for your generally balanced
take on Taiwan’s developments.
This opinion is also set forth in your own 10-year anniversary ads, where you
claim to be “the nation’s most reliable and comprehensive” newspaper, with “the
inside scoop on the arts,” and on those “whose contributions to society deserve
to be recorded.”
Apparently, Taiwan’s musicians and producers in the field of traditional arts
and culture do not meet your criteria, as the nation’s prime music awards
ceremony for traditional arts and culture earned nary a drop of your ink.
Or perhaps you were unaware that the Government Information Office has divided
the 20th annual Golden Melody Awards into two ceremonies — an upcoming one for
pop, and the other for traditional arts and culture, which came and went on June
6, at Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall.
In my opinion, this splitting of the awards was newsworthy in itself.
Why was traditional arts and culture segregated from what most would describe as
the main event? Is it because traditional arts and culture are deemed to be of
little interest? Or were there other motivations?
Whatever the case, we should care. And more importantly, you should have
reported this.
A stroll through your pages on any given day reveals a growing concern that
Taiwanese culture is being sidelined in favor of mainstream — and Chinese —
interests. So how could this development, and this event, have gone unnoticed?
Taiwan’s cultures are struggling to survive, with many facing the risk of
becoming extinct. Hokklo (also known as Taiwanese) and Hakka cultures are in
decline, and UNESCO rates every Aboriginal language in Taiwan as either in
danger of extinction or already extinct.
With music at the heart of tradition culture, a failure to support traditional
and cultural music can only aggravate the problem.
As a three-time nominee at this year’s awards (for best arranger, cross-over
album and producer), I would have appreciated not only coverage of the awards,
but a solid critique, as well. Many felt the performances did not do justice to
Taiwan’s traditional cultures, and only by critiquing such events can we hope to
improve on them in the future.
But by not reporting at all, you only serve to confirm the likely justification
for segregating and marginalizing traditional arts and culture — that nobody
really cares.
Indeed, if the Taipei Times — our great bastion of local culture — doesn’t deem
traditional and cultural music to be newsworthy, then who should? And I suppose,
from a reporting perspective, pop has so much more to offer.
Your very own “Pop Stop” was right on top of this year’s POP-ular Golden Melody
news, reporting that Jay Chou (周杰倫) has eight nominations, while Wang Lee-hom
(王力宏) has secured two nominations.
Reading on, I learned that for his birthday, Wang purchased a used car, which
the Environmental Protection Administration says “spews out 35 times more in
pollutants than a new car.”
Now that is newsworthy.
Reading a little further, I learned that Jolin Tsai (蔡依林) “showed off her sexy
moves” in a concert with Singaporean Stefanie Sun (孫燕姿), who dressed up as “a
lobster-red creature from outer space” and “promised to fix Tsai up with some
male action.”
On the other hand, those bold caps headlines are starting to look a little more
appealing.
MATTHEW LIEN
Taipei
Preserving our
heritage
Friday, Jun 19, 2009, Page 8
After reading the report on President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) hope that an
agreement could be reached with Beijing on teaching overseas compatriots to read
traditional characters and write simplified characters (“Ma calls for agreement
on use of traditional Chinese,” June 10, page 1), I have something to share.
This proposal contradicts Ma’s stated devotion to the preservation of
traditional Chinese characters.
No other writing system in the world has remained unchanged for thousands of
years. The ability to understand traditional characters allows one to appreciate
ancient Chinese literary works. Traditional Chinese characters are undoubtedly
one of the most important forms of cultural heritage in the world. That is why
Ma wants to preserve them. However, the path he is taking might be the wrong
one.
If Ma really wants to preserve this heritage, he should urge people to write
traditional characters. It’s always easier for people to preserve something when
it is used every day. That is also one of the reasons that local languages such
as Hoklo, Hakka and Aboriginal tongues are now taught in elementary school.
Similarly, traditional characters should be promoted overseas. They can be
preserved more easily if they are used by a larger number of people.
Being able to read traditional characters is not enough. If a learner of English
as a second language can easily read English books but can’t spell one word, is
he a successful learner? No. So being able to read but not to write traditional
characters can’t be counted as understanding traditional characters either.
Perhaps because of the political and economic dominance of China in recent
years, simplified characters have become the mainstream.
However, I do hope that Ma will make a bigger effort to preserve such a
beautiful and precious heritage.
CHEN CHUN-CHU
Changhua
A serious
blow to the basic right of protest
By Chang Wen-chen
張文貞
Friday, Jun 19, 2009, Page 8
A Taipei District Court prosecutor recently applied for a “summary judgment” on
the indictment of National Taiwan University sociology professor Lee Ming-tsung
(李明璁), declaring that he was a “prime suspect” in an “illegal outdoor assembly”
— a sit-in protest against the visit of Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) — in
front of the Executive Yuan last November.
This was yet another example of juridical abuse of power that did not take into
consideration the freedom of assembly, which is protected by the Constitution,
international human rights law and the principle of proportionality in Article
26 of the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法).
By staging a peaceful sit-in in front of the Executive Yuan, Lee and his
students were exercising their basic rights of assembly and freedom of speech,
which are also protected by the Constitution, international human rights law and
especially the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that was
signed by the government into law on May 14.
NOT A THREAT
Lee’s peaceful sit-in was not an immediate threat to anyone’s freedom, safety or
possessions, nor was it a clear and present danger to the national security or
social order.
The plaza in front of the Executive Yuan is the best place for ordinary people
to express their opinions to the government.
So why are applications needed for peaceful sit-ins there? Can protesters be
labeled as criminals simply because they did not file an application?
Several years ago, a group of National Chengchi University students staged a
protest against high tuition fees in front of the Ministry of Education.
Legal circles were surprised when one of the students was indicted as a “prime
suspect.”
At that time, the Taipei District Court commendably insisted on the protection
of the student’s freedom of assembly.
PROPORTIONALITY
It cited the principle of proportionality in Article 26 of the Assembly and
Parade Act, believing that even if the protest was an illegal outdoor assembly,
the police still needed to take into account the balance between the public’s
basic right of assembly and other laws and regulations when ordering them to
disperse.
The student was found not guilty.
Unfortunately, the prosecutor insisted on appealing the case, and the Taiwan
High Court failed to protect freedom of assembly by overturning the ruling of
the District Court.
Instead, the court gave the student a choice between detention and a fine on
probation.
Perhaps the court believed that it was doing the student a favor by handing down
such a light penalty, just like the prosecutor’s application for “summary
judgment” on the indictment of Lee.
SERIOUS BLOW
However, the judges were and are possibly still unaware that by doing so they
have dealt a serious blow to the basic right of staging peaceful sit-ins in
Taiwan.
Reform of the Assembly and Parade Act is inevitable. We should not only abolish
the “permission system” in the Act but completely decriminalize such assemblies
to protect the public’s basic right to peaceful sit-ins.
I would like to urge the judiciary to act bravely and be the last line of
defense for the public’s right to peaceful sit-ins and freedom of speech.
Chang Wen-chen is an associate law
professor at National Taiwan University.