Global Voices » Taiwan (ROC)

East Asia's Appetite for Eels Pushing Species to the Brink

I-fan Lin — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 03:50:52 +0000

In Japan, summer is the season of eel.

On the sweltering midsummer days between mid-July and early August, it's traditional to eat a plate of golden-brown broiled unagi kabayaki, or broiled eel. The popular dish is believed to help people stay healthy during the hot weather.

But the tradition is now at risk. Skyrocketing demand for glass eels, once considered a highbrow delicacy, is pushing fishermen to exhaust the population and causing prices to soar. A number of East Asian countries including Japan have proposed ideas on how to preserve the wild eel, but there are so far no concrete efforts underway to curb the trend.

Ida Tetsuji, a columnist from Nippon.com, a Japanese news website, described how the production of eels has been increased fourfold over recent decades to satisfy the increased eel consumption:

Domestic eel production in Japan held at about 40,000 tons a year through the mid-1980s. This was supplemented by imports from Taiwan, which ranged from about 25,000 tons to a high of around 40,000 tons. [...] In 2000 a record high of over 130,000 tons of eel products were imported from China and Taiwan, and domestic sales volume rose to almost 160,000 tons, also a record high. This was almost double the volume of sales 15 years earlier.

Specially cooked eels in Japan. Photo from ysishikawa (CC: AT).

A common misconception is that glass eels can be farmed to keep up with the increased demand. However, eels are catadromous, meaning that part of their life circle is in freshwater and part in saltwater. Since there was no current method to reproduce the eel larvae, the fishermen need to catch the wild glass eels when they enter the river and travel upstream and farm them in ponds.

So without a way to replenish the eel population in the face of such demand, the number of these glass eels caught by fishermen in recent years continues to decrease. “Dogfamily”, an independent reporter in a Taiwanese citizen news portal, Newsmarket, reported [zh] the reality on March 18, 2013:

過去亞洲一年日本鰻苗捕獲量接近100噸，但近4年產量急遽下滑，2010-2012的產量遽降為41、35、26噸；以台灣為例，過去一年有20噸，但2010-2012僅剩4、4、2噸，今年（2013）約1.5噸。

The number of caught glass eels of Japanese eels has dropped dramatically in the recent four years from an average of 100 tons per year to 41, 35, 26 tons in 2010-2012. Take Taiwan for example, Taiwanese fishermen used to catch 20 tons of glass eels annually (e.g., 20 percent of the glass eels caught among the countries along the Kuroshio Current), but the total number dropped to 4, 4, 2 tons in 2010-2012. This year (2013), the number is around 1.5 tons.

Total eel production. Figure from the TRAFFIC report written by Vicki Crook.

The price of glass eels has soared as a result. Dogfamily [zh] pointed out:

幾年前，鰻苗1尾10元[…]今（2012）年的平均價達到180元/尾。以每公斤6000尾來換算，一公斤的鰻苗要價108萬，接近黃金的市價。即使價格如此驚人，但因為捕撈量嚴重不足，苗戶的收入還是下降。

Several years ago, one glass eel was sold for 10 Taiwan dollars [0.34 United States dollars] [...] This year (2012), one glass eel in average is sold for 108 Taiwan dollars [3.62 US dollars]. Since 6,000 glass eels are about one kilogram, one kilogram of glass eels is 1,080,000 Taiwan dollars (36,249 US dollars). This is close to the price of gold. Nevertheless, despite the amazing price, the fishermen’s income decreases because the amount of caught glass eels is so little.

The shortage in supply has resulted in smuggling activities, Dogfamily [zh] explained:

即使台灣經濟部已訂定3月31日前鰻苗禁止出口，但在日方出價高的誘惑力之下，苗商仍透過各種管道以走私的方式將苗輸出至日本。去年12月間，桃園機場就查獲以行李箱攜帶20,000萬尾鰻魚苗走私的案件。根據業者私下透露，1月15日前捕獲的鰻苗，幾乎是100％供應到日本。

Although the Ministry of Economic Affairs in Taiwan has set up regulations to forbid the export of glass eels before March 31, the Taiwanese merchants still find ways to smuggle glass eels to Japan because the price provided by Japanese businessmen is so tempting. Last December, 20,000 glass eels were discovered to be smuggled in suitcases in Taoyuan International Airport. Based on private conversations with the Taiwanese merchants, almost 100 percent of the glass eels caught before January 15 were sold to Japan.

European eels have already been listed in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in June 2007. Earlier on this year, the U.S had considered submitting a proposal for an international trade regulation on eel catches in CITES. At the same time, the Japanese Environment Ministry also designated the Japanese eel as a species at risk of extinction on its red list of endangered freshwater and brackish water fish in last February. However, the move is not legally binding.

In reaction to the pressure for eel preservation, a number of East Asian countries, including Japan, China, Taiwan, and Korea have held several conferences and several preservation procedures have been proposed, including rehabilitation of the eels’ natural environment, restrictions on eel export, and release of adult eels in the rivers.

Production of different species of eels. Figure from the TRAFFIC report written by Vicki Crook.

Nevertheless, with such a huge consumer market, eel merchants will continue to find new ways to make profit. In fact, the Japanese merchants have turned to African eels as an alternative, Dogfamily [zh] reported:

美國意圖將鰻魚列入貿易保護名單的舉動使得日本相當緊張，開始尋找替代的鰻魚來源，最近觸角伸向馬達加斯加的養殖業者，將購買非洲鰻來因應日本鰻價格節節升高以及美洲鰻前途未明的情況。

America’s intention to list eel in CITES makes Japan very nervous, and they have started to find an alternative source for eels. Recently, they contacted eel farmers in Madagascar and plan to buy African eels to avoid the soaring price of eels and prepare for the possible ban on American eels.

At the same time, international NGO, the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Network (TRAFFIC) has also discovered that the Philippines has started exporting large amount of Japanese eels and Luzon eels, a newly discovered species, out of the country:

In July (2012), TRAFFIC surveys found almost 50 listings from businesses in the Philippines offering eel fry or glass eels for sale through online B2B platform Alibaba.com. Several reported they could supply for export hundreds of kilos of glass eels of a variety of eel species every month.

Amount of caught eels. Figure from the TRAFFIC report written by Vicki Crook.

To break the demand-supply cycle, some Japanese have started consumer campaigns to reduce the consumption of eels. Ida Tetsuji on Nippon.com wrote:

Consumers and distributors of eels also bear considerable responsibility for the situation. As a result of the unsustainable inflow of large quantities of imports, eels, formerly considered a deluxe food, have turned into a cheap item sold in bulk through convenience stores and supermarkets […] We need to take this opportunity to transform the eel business from its low-profit, high-volume “quantity over quality” model back to a “quality over quantity” approach. Otherwise the stocks will become even more seriously depleted, and we are liable to sink into a descending spiral in which consumers tire of low-quality eels and stop buying them, causing the eel industry’s profits to decline further and the business as a whole to weaken.

Tirrano, a Japanese blogger from Decent Point, also believed [ja] that despite the gravity of the problem, the solution is rather easy:

どうしたらよいか、激減した原因の反対のことをすることなら簡単に始められそうです。つまり、不必要の多くのウナギを食べないこと、安いからといってウナギを食べないことです。日本の消費量がとてつもなく多すぎるのです。それを30年前ぐらいに激減させればいい。それには、スーパーなどの特売にある、それほどおいしくはない、ウナギを無理して食べないことです。

What to do to avoid the dramatic decrease of Japanese eels is actually easy. In short, we should not eat eels if not necessary, and we should not eat those cheap eels. Eel consumption in Japan is too high. If the amount of eels consumed can be reduced to what it was 30 years ago, conditions would be better. In other words, we should not eat eels only because there is a super sale on eels in the supermarket.

Taiwan Independent News Academy Hits at Corporate Media

inmediahk.net — Sat, 06 Apr 2013 02:08:26 +0000

The media landscape in Taiwan has become a corporate battlefield in the last few years, with the independence of the island's press the biggest casualty.

News outlets are bought and merged with so-called “red” capital, or money with ties to mainland Chinese business, staining the news with communist influence. Media groups take political sides in line with their owners, becoming mouthpieces for the Taiwan's two competing political camps, the Pan-Green Coalition and the more conservative Pan-Blue Coalition. But as mainstream media has corroded in Taiwan, citizen journalism has been on the rise with the blessing and participation of mainstream professionals.

Shirley Ho's article, which originally appeared on Hong Kong-based inmediahk.net on March 25, 2013 in Chinese, introduces the Academy of Independent Media, the latest cooperative effort in Taiwan to change the media environment. The trimmed English version has been translated by Cheung Choi Wan and republished as part of a content-sharing agreement.

Members of the Academy of Independent Media rallied on September 1, Taiwan Journalist's Day.

Last spring, a group of independent journalists and academics in journalism and communication began to plan a school for independent journalists, the Academy of Independent Media. We interviewed Chen Shun-Hsiao, an associate professor at Fu Jen Catholic University in the journalism and communication studies department and one of the founders of the Academy, about its mission.

Taiwan's monopolized media landscape

Chen described the Taiwanese people's discontent and at times outrage with the island's commercial media.

“We have been witnessing traditional media, such as newspaper and TV, turning towards sensationalism one after another because of difficulties in making a profit,” he said. “In some cases, the media even sell news such as embedding commercial and political propaganda in a news report. The government has become their biggest client as the government contracts advertising and marketing services to buy news and influence public opinion.”

He continued: “What the people find more worrying politically is the fact that advertisements paid for by the Chinese Communist Party are found embedded in Taiwan's news. People are also worried about media monopoly in recent years due to merger cases such as the attempt of Want Want China Times Group to acquire the cable TV services operated by China Network Systems; the Next Media merger case; and the failure of the Public Television Service to establish a new board of directors.”

Faced with this depressing mainstream media environment, scholars, students, journalists working for traditional media, and independent online journalists decided to come together to change the swing toward partisan, corporate media.

In the past two years, the civil society has mobilised against media mergers and professional journalists advocated for democratic newsroom as well as defended diversity in news reporting and in speech. Now the Academy wants to build a diverse media ecology by advocating independent journalism.

A fifth estate

The mass media is often called the “fourth estate”. Through fair, objective, and balanced reporting, mainstream media is supposed to monitor government and financial institutions and speak up for disadvantaged social groups.

But when the mainstream media is monopolized by those in power politically and economically, they can no longer play the role of watchdog. Instead, they should be monitored and critiqued by citizens who can make use of the Internet to develop their own media, a “fifth estate”.

The rising influence of citizen journalism in Taiwan gives Chen hope.

He pointed out that “the impact of independent media and citizen journalism on major social issues, such as the Anti Guo-Kuang Petroleum Plant Movement which was ignored by the mainstream and covered mainly by citizen and independent media outlets, has already surpassed that of the mass media. Besides, independent media professionals have been winning important awards in journalism. Recognition for their contribution and professionalism is growing. More and more young people now want to join the rank of independent journalists.”

He continued: “The establishment of the academy is to provide training to people who are interested in becoming independent journalists and to build an ecosphere of independent journalism for a two-pronged assault to resist the monopoly of media by financial groups.”

However, he also pointed out that training is not the only way to support independent citizen journalists. Good reporting needs a new non-commercial form of organisation, community building, and a common space for the accumulation of experience. “The Academy of Independent Journalism will not only teach journalistic skills, but it will also act as an incubator for citizen media organizations and communities, offering workshops and mentoring programs,” Chen explained.

Screen capture of the Taiwan Academy of Independent Media homepage.

The independent and citizen media movement in Taiwan, which emerged with the rise of the Internet, is diverse. Coolloud [zh], which is mainly concerned with socially disadvantaged groups and labour rights, was established in 1999, its slogan being “media movement, movement media”. There is also the Taiwan Environmental Information Centre [zh], PeoPo Citizen Journalism [zh], PNN PTS News Network [zh], Four Corners [zh] which targets new immigrants, New Talk which aims to expose the relationship between media and political power, and News & Market [zh] which was set up last year.

Various journalism associations now have awards for outstanding independent reporting. Independent media professionals have more opportunities than ever to demonstrate their talents, the Association of Taiwan Journalists has claimed, due to the mainstream media's partisan intimacy with political parties and financial institutions.

The Academy of Independent Journalism plans to strengthen and connect this growing media sector by setting up an Association of Independent Journalists that also provides advice to new independent media organizations and Chen envisioned that “in the long run, the academy aims to set up a ‘free news agency’ composed of independent journalists in different areas of reporting. The vision is that the agency will one day become a journalist-centered platform for news production and dissemination.”

Taiwan Denies Entry to Anti-Nuke Visitor Ahead of Protest

I-fan Lin — Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:03:43 +0000

A German man who marched in an anti-nuclear protest two years ago [zh] in Taiwan was detained at Taiwan's international airport and denied entry [zh] into the country on March 8, 2013, a day before protesters planned to hold a large-scale anti-nuclear demonstration there.

Daniel Andres Helmdach is scheduled to be deported from Taiwan, a suspected consequence of his participation in an anti-nuclear demonstration in Kaohsiung on April 30, 2011 [zh] while he was in Taiwan working as a volunteer on conservation projects.

This is not the first time that Taiwan has zeroed in on the participation of foreigners in anti-nuclear activities in Taiwan, where the recent construction of the fourth nuclear power plant in Taiwan has been met with strong criticism because of security concerns. Two Japanese people from Fukushima were warned by the country's immigration office [zh] immediately after they gave a speech at an anti-nuclear demonstration on April 30, 2011.

Photo from International Cultural Youth Exchange (ICYE) Taiwan which Helmdach had participated in 2011.

The country's premier, Yi-Hua Chiang, has called for a referendum to be held on the construction of the Fourth nuclear power plant in August 2013.

After becoming aware of Helmdach's detention, Helmdach's friend Rui-Guang Huang put out a call for help on his Facebook page:

我們的好朋友今天傍晚入境台灣旅遊，在桃園國際機場被擋在外面不得入境，原因是他兩年前來台灣時，觀察紀錄我們的環境教育活動，結果竟被標記，在未被告知的情形下，此時此刻被擋在機場準備送回德國。

Our good friend arrived in Taiwan this evening for sightseeing. His entry was rejected at the Tauyuan International Airport because he joined our environmental education observation activity two years ago in Taiwan. To our surprise, he was targeted and is now prepared for deportation without any notice in advance.

Legislator Shu-Fen Lin called the head of the immigration office and requested them to explain the deportation of Daniel. The immigration office said [zh] that the National Security Council made the decision in 2010 that should a foreigner conduct anything not described in his or her visa, the person would be denied entry to Taiwan three years.

Helmdach worked as a volunteer in Taiwan for one year during 2011 through arrangements made by the International Culture Youth Exchange (ICYE). Rui-Guang Huang explained the nature of Helmdach's volunteer work at that time:

協助麟洛教會莫拉克風災社區重建工作、參與台南社大海灘廢棄物監測及相關環境關懷行動，在台期間認真學習，並善盡國際志工責任，充分配合服務單位的工作需要，並無任何不當行為。

He helped the Linluo church’s communication reconstruction project after Typhoon Morakot and joined the surveillance activities of the waste on the beach and related nature conservation activities. He worked very hard in Taiwan and fulfilled his responsibility as an international volunteer. He cooperated with us and helped complete our projects. He did not conduct anything unseemly.

After the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, Daniel studied issues related to nuclear power and walked with his friends from the Community College in Tainan City during the anti-nuke demonstration [zh] in Kaohsiung on April 30, 2011. Soon after the demonstration, special agents visited the Community College in Tainan City and the Tainan branch of ICYE, but they did not mention anything about Daniel's involvement in unlawful activities.

Taiwan: No Nukes Go Solar

Oiwan Lam — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 02:11:54 +0000

An anti-nuclear symbol designed for Tao indigenous people in Orchid Island, Taiwan. Anti-nuclear campaign T-shirt and products available at Ciongzo.com

After Ang Lee's Oscar Win, China Imagines Cinema Beyond Censors

Abby — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 00:50:40 +0000

Looking to Taiwanese-born director Ang Lee's Oscar win for Best Director with pride and envy, mainland Chinese web users frustrated with the communist regime's tight grip on the film industry are wondering about their own country's cinematic potential.

A search of Lee's name yields [zh] more than 70,886 results and 4,165,630 discussions, making it the second most searched term on popular Chinese microblogging site Sina Weibo as of the afternoon of February 25, 2013.

This is the second Academy Award win for Lee, who thanked Taiwan during his acceptance speech for its cooperation in the making of “Life of Pi“. In 2005, when he won the award for Best Director for his movie Brokeback Mountain, the Chinese media censored his acceptance speech, omitting any references to his native Taiwan or homosexuality.

Lee concluded his acceptance speech this time around with a “thank you” in Mandarin, causing some Chinese viewers to swell with pride. But others warned not be get so excited about the cultural nod, emphasizing that Lee's win had nothing to do with China.

Some Weibo users, such as ”Qianzhe Yang Fang Lang“ [zh], put emphasis on the word “hua ren”, a term used to describe ethnic Chinese people living abroad, as opposed to “zhong guo ren”, meaning Chinese citizens:

Ang Lee picked up his second Best Director award at this year's Oscars. A screen shot of the ceremony from youku.

李安是个好的华人导演，但您有听到china吗？别太往自己脸上贴金

Ang Lee is a good “hua ren” director, did you hear the word “China” in it? Don't put feathers in your own cap.

Another user wrote [zh]：

人家谢谢台湾又没感谢中国！

He expressed his gratitude to Taiwan, not China!

Writer “Tianyou” wondered [zh] why some were drawing a connection between mainland China and Lee：

李安导演获最佳导演，有人狂欢，说这是中国人的骄傲。我很是奇怪。人家李安获奖是人家个人的事儿，即使值得骄傲，那也是台湾教育，美式教育的成功，跟某些人有鸟关系？

Ang Lee's win for Best Director made some people so excited, they said it's China's pride. However, I feel a bit strange, as it's his own business. Even when it comes to pride, it's due to education in Taiwan and the US. How does it have anything to do with us?

However, Jiuzhouzhi magazine editor “Jiangnan Ricardo” disagreed [zh] that Lee's win meant nothing for China:

虽然有朋友觉得李安获奖是个人的事，但我还是觉得究其履历和思维方式李安是个有明显中国文化烙印的中国导演，从「卧虎藏龙」至今他的电影中常有中国式的思辨，包括「派的一生」。他用他的方式让各国的人多一个了解中国文化的渠道, 作为中国人很为他高兴。

Although some friends think Ang Lee's win is his own business, I think his thinking features Chinese culture, which can be seen in his movies such as “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” and “Life of Pi“. He used his method to present Chinese culture to the world, being Chinese I'm happy for him.

Many netizens attributed Lee's success to the free entertainment industries in Taiwan and the US. ”Keguan Nvjia Yunchuang” commented [zh]：

他要是生活在大陆就肯定没戏！

If he were to live in mainland, he wouldn't have made it!

User “Shouwangzhe” echoed [zh]：

李安为什么能够如此成功？答案很简单：因为他成长于台湾。

Why is he so successful? The answer is simple: because he grew up in Taiwan.

Famous commentator “Zhu Qi“ wrote [zh]:

中国的文艺复兴还是由台湾人先走一步，恭喜台湾！民国的国共战争失败了，但民国的文化传承和民主制度仍在强劲地发力！！

Taiwanese are ahead of us in terms of culture and arts. Congratulations to Taiwan. Although the they lost to the Communist Party during the Chinese Civil War, their culture and system still prevail!

Ang Lee's win also served as a reminder of China's strict film censorship. User ”Zantan Wuwei” pointed out that China is stifling creativity [zh]：

中国大陆至今无法问鼎奥斯卡，为什么？没有创造的自由，只有宣传的使命，这注定了文化的败落。一个把政治歌颂摆在比奥斯卡更高位置的社会，无法创造人类能够承传的文化。

No one from the mainland has won any Oscars. Why? Because there's no freedom in creativity and film production, only propaganda, which has lead to a decline of culture. In a society where political praise sings louder than Oscars, no one is able to create great art.

The system impedes good directors, user “Hexie De Tianxia” wrote：

大师级别，其实中国也有，只是体制决定了你该拍何种电影而已！

There is no lack of good directors in China, but the system decides what movies you make!

Just a few days’ before Ang Lee's win, China's State Administration of Radio Film and Television (SARFT) announced that “from now on all televised documentaries in China need to be submitted to SARFT for review first.”

Wang Ran, CEO of China eCapital Corporation, a leading private investment bank in China commented [zh] to his 2.65 million fans on Weibo：

别人都是看看好莱坞的热闹而已，只有他们是在不断以实际行动帮助好莱坞永葆全球影坛的霸主地位。

Most people are just watching Hollywood for entertainment, but they [the Chinese government] are helping Hollywood to ensure its global empire status by doing this.

Taiwan Politician Tries, Quits Sina Weibo

Oiwan Lam — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 06:49:54 +0000

Frank Hsieh, former presidential nominee of Taiwan’s pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), opened an account on Sina Weibo on February 19, 2013. However, the account was deleted less than 24 hours later. More from China Beat.

China Not Blocking Hack Attack Discussion

Abby — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 08:15:12 +0000

U.S. cyber security firm Mandiant has reported that the Chinese People's Liberation Army is behind many cyber attacks against American organizations, but the usually heavy-handed Chinese government is not blocking online discussion of the news, according to TeaLeafNation. Taiwan-based Next Media Animation has produced a cheeky animated explainer of the hacking revelations.

Taiwanese Writer Finds Poetry in Laid-off Workers’ Railway Protest

I-fan Lin — Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:39:37 +0000

Laid-off factory workers facing a lawsuit from the Taiwanese government over “unpaid debt” protested February 5, 2013 [zh] by lying across the tracks at a Taipei train station, bring traffic to a standstill.

The group of workers, who lost their jobs 16 years ago when many factories fled Taiwan for China and other countries to cut labor costs, received money at the time from the government body in charge of protecting labour rights meant to help them get back on their feet. But last year, that government body, called the Council of Labour Affairs, decided to sue the victims, demanding that they return the so-called “loan”.

Image from BoTh Ali Alone.

Not so many people are sympathetic to the plight of these desperate workers. So, inspired by the latest protest, Taiwanese writer-animator ‘BoTh Ali Alone’ [zh] created an illustration to show his support for these victims of de-industrialization.

BoTh Ali Alone's illustration is accompanied by a poem titled “Lying on the Railway”, which he wrote to describe a demoralized world in which people view other people's misery without any sympathy:

《臥軌》

Lying on the Railway

有一座小島，人從出生就住在電車裡。
居民的人生目標就是沿著軌道向前衝
手持車票的居民
從未見過外面的世界，
因為車窗上都是螢幕
播着美麗的風景

There is an island, where people live in the train since they were born.
The goal of their life is moving ahead along the railway.
They have the tickets for the train,
but they have never seen the world outside.
All the windows are covered by the monitors
that show all the beautiful scenery.

別下車
下車你就回不去了
你會發現
政府不停地建設鐵路
電車能去任何地方
卻讓整座島變得沒有任何值得去的地方
除了一望無際的鐵路之外一片荒蕪

Do not get off the train.
If you get off the train, there is no way to go back.
You will find that
the government keeps building railways,
so the train can go everywhere,
but there is no place on the island worth going anymore,
because there is nothing other than the railways.

而買不起車票的人，
住在鐵軌的夾縫中間求生存。
被碾過的時候，
車裡的人還會抱怨路途顛簸。
— with 需要被支持的人.

For those who cannot afford the ticket,
they try to survive between the railways.
When they are crushed by the train,
those on the train only complain about the jolt.
–with those who need to be supported.

Taiwan: Who Misled Noam Chomsky?

Oiwan Lam — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 08:05:06 +0000

Chomsky's support for the anti-media monopoly campaign in Taiwan has been reported as being misled by activists. [Public domain photo]

The photo above, in which Noam Chomsky is holding a placard, is part of a global campaign organized by Taiwanese students against media monopoly in Taiwan. Chomsky's photo has been circulated widely via online social media since early January 2013. However, a number of news outlets recently reported that he was misled by Taiwanese anti-media monopoly activists into supporting the campaign. What has exactly happened? Who misled Chomsky?

In the past few days, a number of mainstream media outlets run by the Want Want China Times Group in Taiwan reported that Chomsky was misled by a young Taiwanese female student, Lin Ting-An. Below is a list of translated headlines:

1. Chomsky: If I knew the campaign is against China, I would not have held the placard [zh] – China Times 04﹣02﹣2013
2. Anti-media monopoly became anti-China campaign, Chomsky was set up [zh] – China Times 29-01-2013
3. Misled to hold the placard, Chomsky: This is serious distortion [zh] – China Times 28-01-2013

In addition to the newspapers, the Citi TV channel, also controlled by Want Want China, ran a one-hour news commentary program on January 29 and 30, 2013 to “clarify” Chomsky's position. The program accused Lin Ting-An, who invited Chomsky to hold the placard, of misleading and using the famous linguist, “the conscience of the U.S”. The commentators in the program also criticized the strategy of the media monopoly movement for singling out pro-China capital, namely Want Want China Times, for its campaign. Below is a short clip of a Citi TV interview with Chomsky:

The media reports were triggered by email communications between Macau based media professor Shih-Diing Liu and Chomsky in which Liu explained his understanding of the anti-media monopoly movement in Taiwan on January 27 2013:

However, I am unsure if you have realized that this anti-media monopoly movement, with its high level of participation among young people, cannot be understood as a simply a movement seeking freedom of the press and democracy on the island. The participants, speakers, and interveners (including the mainstream media, scholars, and groups who have followed along and appropriated the issue) not only focus on the issue of media resources being monopolized by capitalists but also point toward an enemy. This enemy happens to be the one that the government of your country has been cautiously dealing with. However, in the context of Taiwan and the Taiwan Strait, using the name of “defending Taiwan” to refuse, oppose, and reject all people and matters relating to China and the Chinese government is not an isolated phenomenon, and it needs to be placed in the hegemonic structure led by the United States that you have described so we can fully understand it. The slogan in your hands should also be interpreted in a specific political context.

In response to Liu's long email Chomsky wrote a brief reply which was quoted and made public by Liu in his Facebook:

Thanks for the interesting comments, which go far beyond anything I know about. I also don’t recall a placard referring to “Chinese manipulation.” What I was shown, and held, didn’t go beyond media monopoly and freedom of press. I hope that interpretations don’t go beyond that.

Attached to Chomsky's reply is Liu's rather lengthly interpretation which was picked up by China Times on its January 28 news report and turned into a news and commentary framework among Want Want China Times’ media outlets for use against the anti-media monopoly campaign. Liu interpreted Chomsky's photo as “abduction”:

[...]如果人家喬姆斯基並不知道此一訴求，你把人家“綁架”來舉個牌子迎合你自己的立場需求，是不是也太不尊重對方了？為什麽不充分告知人家你們真正的反對中國的立場呢？為什麼牌子上，只有”反對媒體壟斷”有英文翻譯呢？你反中國的立場大可以明白表示，讓對方清楚認知考慮後再表態，不需要遮遮掩掩。是否因為怕喬老要是知道了這個立場，未必會表態支持，索性就模糊其辭，就不得而知了。但如果喬老人家根本就不知道你運動所包括的反中訴求，就把人家趕鴨子上架，這樣的做法，未免也太缺乏政治技巧了吧！[...]

[…]If Chomsky did not know about this demand [anti-China factor], you have “abducted” him by asking him to hold a placard that expressed your own position. Isn't this rather disrespectful? Why didn't you explain clearly your anti-China position to him? Why was the only English translation the slogan “anti-media monopoly”? Why do you have to cover this up and not let him know your anti-China position? Are you afraid that if Chomsky knew the position, he would not have shown his support? That's why the slogan has been blurred? Of course we don't know the real intention. But if Chomsky did not know there is an anti-China factor in your movement and you placed him in the duck's window display [meaning abduction], your political tactic is very poor!

他所認定和支持的立場，針對的是反對媒體壟斷和媒體新聞自由。喬老並不希望外界的解讀，踰越這個範疇，或加油添醋。問題是，台灣部分反中人士和媒體，卻綁架他來為自己的立場掩護。每個運動都有自己的立場訴求，但為自己的立場訴求辯護手段要經得起檢驗，要用道理說服人。

按此理解，如果喬姆斯基當時不是被誤導、被糊弄，就不知道怎麽回事了。那些要求他舉牌的，自己應當最清楚。人家顯然沒有被告知完整訊息，就被硬扯進來為你們自己的立場背書。你們這種暗渡陳倉、移花接木的做法，和你們口口聲聲所反對的言論壟斷和扭曲，有什麼兩樣？你們不就是打着”反壟斷”的正義旗幟，做相反的事嗎？

What he knew and supported was against media monopoly and supported media and press freedom. He doesn't want people to misinterpret and add “other favors” to his position. The issue at stake is, some anti-China people and media have abducted him to strengthen their position. Every movement has their own stand but they have to establish their position with valid means and reason.

According to such understanding, I don't know what would have happened if Chomsky had not been misled or fooled. Those who asked him to hold the placard should know exactly what had happened. It is obvious that he had not been told the compete message and been dragged to support your position. The way the messages have been hidden and transplanted is as bad as the kind of distortion and monopoly that you criticize. Under the flag of “anti-monopoly”, you are doing the opposite.

To clarify the situation, Lin Ting-An posted her email communication to Chomsky in her Facebook. The email, inviting Chomsky to join the campaign, explained in detail the background of the campaign against Pro-China media group Want Want China Times’ acquisition of Next Media, with the translation of the placard slogans:

Here is now a horrible media monopoly event happening in Taiwan: The Pro-China Want Want China Times Group chairman, Tsia Eng-meng, is going to buy the Taiwanese branch of Next Media (which was owned by Hong Kong mogul Jimmy Lai). If this purchase is approved, Mr. Tsai will control about 46% of Taiwan's newspaper market. Mr. Tsai not only owns the newspaper (China Times, Commercial Times), but also the magazine, TV channel, and cable TV service, and his turning a blind eye to Beijing's human rights violations (He denies the Tiananmen square massacre) make us become really worried about the future of Taiwanese media.

In order to against this purchase and the government ignorance, Taiwanese students have launched several protests since November and will hold another one on New Year's Eve. There is now an activity which urges global supporters to photograph themselves, holding the slogan of “Oppose Media Monopoly, Reject the black hand of China, uphold freedom of the press, I protect Taiwan in ___”, and upload it online. (I attached my photo which took at Yang Ming university, Taiwan.)

Although Chomsky has further clarified that he had not been misled by anyone and the incident was a “misunderstanding”, his statement has not had much bearing on the major media outlets.

The debate about whether or not the China Factor should be stressed in the anti-media monopoly campaign has been a debate within the movement since day one. On the one hand, activists are aware that the media liberalization policy since the 1990s has been the driving force of the capital monopoly of Taiwan mainstream media. On the other hand, the influence of mainland China capital, as well as its political agenda to take control of Taiwanese media corporations, has become more and more obvious in the Want Want China Times’ acquisition of TV Cable Network and Taiwan Next Media. Similar debates have been going on among activists for months. After the Chomsky incident, in the anti-Want Want China Times campaign page, Jiangeng Chiou raised the issue [zh] again:

我想我們應該更認真地討論「反媒體壟斷」是否該和「反中國黑手」拖勾。這波反壟斷運動已經引起大眾的廣泛注意，是個推動媒體改革的很好的契機，如果只是勾起藍綠意識和統獨議題，對於更廣的媒體問題幫助不大，非常可惜。看看公視問題，台灣有好的媒體人，受到不只中國還有其他政治和財團力量狹持。反中國黑手的同時，何不連其他政治黑手，財團黑手全部一起反一反？

I think we should discuss if the “anti-media monopoly” should go hand -n-hand with “anti-China manipulation”. Currently the anti-media monopoly has attracted the public attention and it is a golden opportunity to campaign for media reform. The blue vs green and unification vs. independence sentiment is not helping the campaign. Let's take a look at the problem faced by Taiwan Public Television Service, the pressure faced by media workers in Taiwan not only comes from China, but also other political clans and capital. Apart from China, we have to confront other political and corporate forces.

In a comment Charlene Delerk replied:

關鍵是現在想操控台灣媒體的,正是中國政府,而台灣某些特定人士則做為其手套.討論”要不要拿掉中國政府因素',那就正中了中國政府的下懷,因為支持者已經在這個問題點上內亂分化了.其實這事幾個月前就討論過了,現在還跟著中天起舞,拿出來炒冷飯,真的是都餿了.喜歡中國的就去中國,沒人攔著

The key is China government wants to manipulate Taiwanese media. Some people who have occupied special positions have become their groves [covering their black hands]. The discussion of whether or not we should delete China factor in the campaign is serving their purpose of dividing our supporters. This issue has been discussed some months ago, now people are still dancing with CitiTV and re-firing the rice that is also sour [meaning turning outdated news into news]. If they like China so much, they can go to China, no one stops them.

For those who are outside Taiwan, it is very difficult to understand the political dynamic and it seems rather inevitable that Chomsky be misled and distorted in such a media and political environment.

Taiwan's Nuclear-free New Year's Wish

I-fan Lin — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 06:48:19 +0000

Every year, Taiwanese gather around Taipei 101, the tallest building in Taiwan to see fireworks and celebrate the coming of the new year.

This year, the celebration was very special as popular singers, environmental and youth activists worked together to present a nuclear-free homeland as Taiwanese people's common wish [zh] for 2013. Singers performed in new year's eve parties and sang anti-nuclear songs. Environment groups organized a joint signature campaign to build consensus among Taiwanese for a nuclear-free policy.

The most eye-catching action was delivered by a number of youth activists under the Citizens No Nuke [zh, en, jp, de] network, who projected an anti-nuclear sign on Taipei 101 during the annual fireworks. They uploaded their action to Youtube afterwards.

Below is an explanation of their action in the group's website [zh, en, jp, de, fr, ko]:

Taiwan bears critical risk as two nuclear power plants, NPP1 and NPP2, which the seismic resistance coefficient is estimated evidently less than that of Fukushima Daiichi NPP, are located tightly alongside the active fault zone of the volcanic arc…According to nuclear energy researcher Koide Hiroaki, once the radioactive materials of NPP4 Taiwan are released, the exposure to the Northern region will result in 30,000 death immediately and 7 million residents with chronic diseases or cancer. The radioactive material will spread out through sea current and atmosphere, bringing the disaster to neighboring countries, and eventually global-wise. Every person in the world inevitably shares the potential risk and consequences of nuclear power technology.

Regardless of the debates and anxiety from the society, or the technical issues of safety and management, the officials of the government haven’t clarified the problems without the determination of self-responsibility. The discontent of the situation has reached a critical point.

It is time to end the technopoly… With no pains or bloods split, we declare that Taiwan as a democratic country, our will not to be dominated by the privileged 1%. And without the responsibility of our government to the beings of the Earth, the 99% will join together and exercise for their right.

We are the 99%, and you will see us in the end.

Anti-nuclear sign projected on Taipei 101. Image from Citizens Nonuke.

There are some comments under the Youtube video. ksutgman found the action meaningful:

謝謝好感動這比101煙火好看精彩100萬倍

Thank you. I am moved. This is a million times more fabulous than the fireworks at Taipei 101!

While some people found this alien-like sign ruined the fireworks, 朱想容 said:

惶恐這個反核標誌，卻不去反思台灣的核電多可怕，我該說什麼呢？

If you are afraid of this anti-nuclear sign but you do not think about the danger of the nuclear power plants in Taiwan, what can I say?

Though many netizens are excited about the action, the management of Taipei 101 is unhappy [zh] and is considering taking legal action against the activists. Sophia Hong pointed out that while an image projection that harms no one is disturbing to some, people should pay attention to the Tao people who have been living with nuclear waste everyday for 30 years:

Anti-nuclear sign projected on Taipei 101. Image from Citizens Nonuke.

你覺得核廢料那些玩意是合理應該出現在別人的島上，讓別人生活何止充滿惶恐，他們一輩子要面對的是健康上的恐懼!!!!

Do you think it is reasonable that something like nuclear waste is present on other people’s island? The nuclear waste not only fills their lives with great fear but also makes them face health threats for their whole lives!!!!

Is Taiwan ready to become a nuclear-free country? On Jan 9, 2013, the Legislative Yuan will start to examine the draft law on the promotion of a nuclear-free homeland [zh], which was proposed in 2005. If this draft law is passed, the three nuclear power plants will cease to operate once their service lives have expired and the construction of the fourth nuclear power plant will be stopped.

Currently, the residents affected by the construction of the fourth nuclear power plant are pressing for a referendum [zh] to stop its construction in 2013.

International Fast Food Chains Involved in China's Chicken Scandal

Oiwan Lam — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 04:41:30 +0000

State broadcaster China Central Television recently exposed that at least two chicken suppliers for American, Japanese and Taiwanese fast-food chains fed their chickens excessive hormones and 18 different types of antibiotics, to make “instant chickens” that grow from 30 grams to 3.5kg within 40 days.

The fast-food chains involved in the food safety scandal are KFC and McDonalds from the USA, Yoshinoya from Japan and Yonghe King from Taiwan.

Currently, China is the biggest market for the fast-food industry. KFC, a chain of the Yum! Brands, currently receives 44% of its annual revenue from China, and has become the main target in this drug-fed chicken scandal. According to the Shanghai Food and Drug Administration's report [zh], between 2010 and 2011, among the 19 food samples provided by the Yum! Brands, eight failed antibiotics safety tests.

Animal rights photo by flickr user, Shira Golding (CC: BY-NC)

Since the Chinese people are used to all kinds of toxic food scandals, most of them just feel frustrated about the overall situation. Sarcastic remarks [zh] like the followings are rather common:

美丽人生2673263427：我很幸运，吃过瘦肉精，喝过三聚氰胺，皮鞋胶囊，假的药，人造鸡蛋，速生鸡，塑化酒，，，，，一般的毒我已习惯，望猛烈的产品结束我的幸运生涯

美丽人生2673263427：I am so lucky. I have tasted Ractopamine meat, Melamine milk, capsules made from wasted leather shoes, fake medicine, artificial eggs, fast-growing chicken, plasticizer wine… I am used to all things toxic. Looking forward to more poison to eventually end my luck.

库洪哈密瓜：以后生病了不用买药了，直接吃只鸡腿就行了。

库洪哈密瓜：In the future, when we are ill, we won't need to buy medicine, a chicken leg will do.

As the scandal involves foreign fast-food chains, which are considered more reliable in food safety control when compared with local restaurants, some nationalistic commentators took the opportunity to attack foreign brands. At the same time, there are also counter-arguments saying that local authorities should take the blame. Below is a selection of comments [zh] from an ifeng.com news thread:

Weirdo_Hai：希望肯德基这种暴力黑企业能早日退出中国市场

Weirdo_Hai：I wish evil corporations like KFC would leave China's market immediately.

易租易购_以租代购_以租代售：还吃肯德基吗？事实证明洋快餐同样会为了利益入乡随俗，在监管不力违法成本低廉的地方，任何企业都有可能以身试法。

易租易购_以租代购_以租代售：Can we still eat at KFC? It is now proven that foreign fast-food chain also follow our customs. In a country where there is little monitor and the cost of unlawful behavior is so low, any corporation will test the legal line.

璐瑶谣：关闭这些洋拉圾店，多开北方大饼店，至少富一群下岗人。

璐瑶谣：Shut down all these foreign junk food stores. Open more local Chinese pizza shops, the fortune will then go to the unemployed.

g老三：毒鸡横行，相关部门到那里去了？肯德基是个企业，难道也要自己成立个食品检疫局？

g老三：Toxic chickens are everywhere, where are our monitoring authorities? KFC is just a corporation should it set up its own quality supervision, inspection and quarantine department?

木小兔向前冲：树大招风，不吃肯德基，其他餐饮业的鸡难道就能放心吃吗？？

木小兔向前冲：Big tree attracts wind. If we can't eat KFC, can we trust other restaurants?

秦大勇Y：市场上卖的鸡就安全？中国供应商也不是好东西，尤其是政府监管睁一只眼闭一只眼，你敢说他们不知道？

秦大勇Y：Are the chicken in the open market safe? The Chinese suppliers are the ones to blame. The government is not consistent in monitoring food safety, do you believe that the authorities are really ignorant of such practice?

Other netizens have developed conspiracy theories out of the scandal [zh]:

即墨雅泰侯屹：肯德基速生鸡的养殖方式至少在中国存在10年了，缘何今天才被央视报道？有人一语道破天机：广告！2013年肯德基不准备在央视做广告了。2011年以前双汇在央视一直投放广告多年，于是什么问题也没有发现，而当决定不投放广告了，结果就出事了。

即墨雅泰侯屹：The practice of KFC chicken farms has been existed in China for at least 10 years. Why has CCTV picked up the news today? Some revealed the answer: Advertisement. KFC plans to stop its advertisement on CCTV. Same thing happened to Shuanghui, before it stopped advertising on CCTV there was no news on the company's food safety problem. As soon as the company stopped advertising on [CCTV], the scandal broke out.

楚奇文kevin：我觉得吧，其实白羽鸡，速生鸡什么的都是多少年公开秘密了。全世界都是这么养殖的，曝光主要是针对白胜公司。针对美帝，因为美帝最近搞过我国企中石油啊，华为啊，中兴啊什么的。赤果果的报复！

楚奇文kevin：Actually, white feather chicken or the fast-growing chicken are open secrets for many years. Chickens are raised like that all over the world. The news is meant to scandalize the Yum! Brand and attack the US imperial power. Recently the US government has been giving Chinese companies a difficult time, look at the scandals around CNPC, Huawei, and ZTE Corporation. This is obviously revenge.

Campaign Against Pro-China Media Monopoly in Taiwan Turns Global

I-fan Lin — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 01:23:17 +0000

After the Taiwan-based media company Want Want China Times Group acquired 60% of the country's second largest cable television service this July, it continued to expand this November, acquiring 32% of the country’s best-selling newspaper Apple Daily [zh], from Hong Kong-based Next Media Ltd.

It is obvious that the pro-China chairman of Want Want China Times Group, Tsai Eng-Meng, aims to extend his influence in Taiwan and its monopoly in media is generating a lot of anxiety among local Taiwanese who are worried about Chinese government intervention in Taiwan politics.

Despite mass students’ protest against media monopoly following the latest acquisition in Taiwan, the government ignored their concerns and demands. Now overseas Taiwanese have organized an online protest across the world.

Yu-Hsi Liu, an economist, explained why she supports this protest. Use with permission.

Yu-Hsi Liu, an economist, explained why she supports this protest:

I know libertarians do not support Anti-monopoly law. But in Taiwan, anti-monopoly has different context: we are facing a exogenous force which threatens our free market and freedom. Its monopoly power does not come from a natural market process; it comes from the rent-seeking of [ruling party] KMT and CCP [Communist Party of China]. It is why we are opposing to monopoly in the media market.

A group of Taiwanese students in Egypt [zh] also explained how media monopoly would bias the audience’s viewpoint:

兩周前加薩砲火再起，西方主流媒體大多單方面的報導以色列政府所發出的聲明，而輕描淡寫報導以色列軍隊造成慘烈的平民死傷……各大西方媒體的不平衡報導是背後有無數政治和資金操作導致。……再反觀台灣，當我們的媒體被中國資金控制，為財團利益屈服，我們該如何能看見真相？

Protester holding protest slogan at Beijing Tiananmen Square. Photo from What's Next Facebook page, non-commercial use.

Two weeks ago, when the war started again in the Gaza Strip, most of the mainstream media in the western countries only reported the statement released by the Israel government and slightly mentioned the tremendous casualty caused by the military force sent from Israel[…]The bias in reports in western media is due to the manipulation of numerous politically influential entities and money[…]When we look at Taiwan, if the finance of our media is controlled by China and the media yields to the syndicate, how can we see the truth?

To protest against the influence of the Chinese government, a Taiwanese protested at Tiananmen square, a place symbolizing the civilians’ resentment and political repression in China.

Protester from Germany. Photo from What's next's Facebook Page, non commercial use.

An online protester’s note [zh] submitted from Germany may summarize the thoughts of these supporters across the world:

趁我現在還能夠說話，言論發表不會被莫名其妙撤掉，趁你現在抓不到我，趁你現在封不住我的嘴，我要大聲說:「不管你是錢賺得不夠多，還是手上握有更多更黑暗的政治利益，長遠來看，這麼做就是出賣了國家的安全，我不願意被你們控制，我不想當個愚民，我只是一個大學生，但我堅持抗議到底。」

When I still have the opportunity to speak, when my post will not be removed without any reason, when you cannot catch me, when you cannot stop me from talking, I would like to say it loud, ‘whether [you do it] because you did not earn enough money or you have more dark political motives, in the long-term, you are selling out our national security. I do not want to be controlled by you, and I do not want to be a stupid person. I am only a college student, but I will keep protesting until you change.’

Taiwan is Sick: Student Protesters Tell the Minister of Education

Oiwan Lam — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 01:07:05 +0000

Last month, Hong Kong based Next Media Ltd. announced its decision to sell its Taiwan print and television operations for HKD4.64 billion (USD 598.7 million) to a number of Taiwanese corporates, including 32% shares to Want Want China Holdings, considered a controversial media giant since its Chairman Tsai Eng-meng has a lot of business ties with mainland China and has been advocating closer cross-strait cooperation through its TV, newspapers and magazines, with their positive reports about China related news.

Foreseeing the adverse impact of the deal, editors and journalists from Taiwan Next Media Group have been demonstrating for editorial independence from the future management, while Taiwanese students have gone on an Anti-Want Want campaign over the past two weeks, to warn the public against the adverse effect of media monopoly.

Protesters, held a press conference outside Executive Yuan on November 27, 2012. Photo from Facebook Page: I don't Want Want. Non-Commercial Use.

Since November 26, 2012, students started gathering outside the Executive Yuan, demanding [zh] the legislation for Media antimonopoly law, calling for editorial independence agreement within media organizations and against the deal between Next Media Ltd and Want Want China Times. Despite the cold weather and rain, many students stayed overnight and the next day, the students, together with a number of journalism professors and media workers, held a press conference at the protest venue.

Several confrontations between the police and the students took place as the head of Executive Yuan failed to show up and answer their demands; the student activists then decided to hold another gathering on November 29, 2012 outside the Fair Trade Commission. Meanwhile, overseas Taiwanese students have been expressing their support by uploading photos with the following slogans [zh]:

Collage of support photos from Taiwanese students in Europe. Photo from Facebook Page: Taiwan EU Watch. Non Commercial Use.

反對媒體壟斷
拒絕中國黑手
捍衛新聞自由
我在___守護台灣

Against Media Monopoly
Reject the black hand from China
Defend Free Press
Protect Taiwan in_______

Back home, students from eastern and southern part of Taiwan travelled to Taipei to join the November 29 protest. Wang Weilong （黃瑋隆）was among one these students and he made a video to record his feelings and journey:

It turned out that more than 30 universities [zh] had student representatives in the protest and they marched together from the Executive Yuan to the Legislative Yuan so as to put pressure on their representatives to follow up the legislation of anti-media monopoly law.

In reaction to the student protest actions, the head of the Taiwan Education Bureau issued a letter on November 30, 2012 asking various universities’ student affairs offices to pay attention to their students’ health and hand in the list of students who had participated in the protest. The document leaked out and outraged the students who issued a statement [zh] condemning the Education Bureau for being hypocritical in showing their care:

我們要再次呼籲政府勿破壞台灣民主自由的根基。在行政院前，我們面對警棍、盾牌與鎮暴警察；在公平會，我們面對層層拒馬與鐵絲網；回到校園裡，我們又必須被教官、校方關切。我們想告訴蔣偉寧部長：「報告部長，我們有理想，我們想捍衛台灣的言論自由與民主，我們很健康。但是教育部病了，企圖壓制學生運動；而這個國家也病了，她的自由根基正被掏空」。

We appeal to the government not to undermine the foundations of democracy and freedom in Taiwan anymore. We were faced with riot police armed with batons and shields outside Executive Yuan, barricades and iron net outside the Fair Trade Commission. Back to school campus, we have to be cared for by school officers. We want to tell the head of Education Bureau, Chiang Wei-Ling, “Chief, we have a dream, we want to defend Taiwan's democracy and freedom. We are very healthy, but the Education Bureau is sick. It tries to repress the students’ movement. This country is sick, its foundation for freedom has been eroded away.”

Signature Campaign Against the Revival of Oligarchic Politics in South Korea

Oiwan Lam — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 04:12:42 +0000

South Korean NGO, National Association of Professors for Democracy (NAPD), initiated a signature campaign calling for the support of academics in Asia against the revival of oligarchic politics in South Korea and other Asian countries in times of economic crisis and regional political instabilities. The statement is in reaction to the upcoming South Korean presidential election in which the conservative candidate, Park Geun-hye, appeals to the voters for reviving the glorious tradition of his father's military dictatorship era. (via inmediahk.net [zh followed by en])

Laid-off Workers Turn from Victims to Debtors in Taiwan

I-fan Lin — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:47:41 +0000

In a rather ironic case, Taiwan's Council of Labour Affairs (CLA), a government body in charge of protecting labour rights, wants to sue workers who were laid-off by factory owners sixteen years ago. The council seeks money from the Legislative Yuan to bring legal action against more than 2,000 workers, who they say never returned the ‘loan’ the government offered as compensation for being laid off.

Since July 2012, members of the Alliance for Workers of Closed Factories (AWCF) and their supporters have been protesting against the CLA‘s [zh] decision. One of the most widely reported action was the occupation of the Taipei Subway station on August 10, 2012.

Victims turn into debtors

On August 10, 2012, workers from AWCF occupied the Taipei Subway Station against the CLA's lawsuit. Photo from coolloud.org. Permission for non-commercial use.

The story begins in 1998, when many factories in Taiwan relocated to China and other countries [zh] to cut their labour costs. Some of these factory owners announced bankruptcy and refused to pay their workers salary, retirement and other compensation. Many of the factory owners fled to other countries and reopened their factories, leaving the workers in Taiwan protesting in despair. The CLA was then assigned to negotiate with these labourers and the factory owners. While the factory owners refused to pay the compensation, the CLA decided to settle the conflict by granting “loans” to the workers to release them from financial burden before they found new jobs. The understanding was that the workers would not have to pay-back the so-called “loan” as the workers were also victims.

But recently, the CLA broke their promise and asked the Legislation Yuan for NTD20.56 million (approximately USD 709,000) to sue more than 2,000 workers who have not paid back their “loan”. In reaction to the decision, the AWCF protested in front of the Legislation Yuan [zh] on Oct 31. The CLA's action is outrageous, as Tiny fatty pointed out [zh] in his blog:

一個勞工工作了近半輩子結果領了退休金竟然還要做償還，
如果事件發生在你我身上的話，你不會想上街頭為自己討回公道嗎？

A worker spent half of his life-time working and finally get his pension. Now he has to pay it back. If such a thing happens to you or me, won't you demonstrate and seek justice?

To avoid further conflict, the CLA agreed to suspend the lawsuit, but refused [zh] to revoke the budget for the lawsuit, which means it may pursue the lawsuit later. In fact, according to Taiwan independent media, coolloud.org's report [zh] CLA's representative Keng-Pei Li (李庚霈) insisted that the money distributed to the workers 16 years ago was a “loan”:

不管過去的政府跟工人們談過什麼，現在也沒有記錄作憑證，目前勞委會只想找到一個雙方都能接受的處理方式。

No matter what the government negotiates with these labourers, we do not have any record as evidence. Now CLA only wants to find a solution that both CLA and these labourers can accept.

Jack and the beanstalk questioned [zh] the function of CLA:

勞工局不是應該要替勞方權益著想嗎?
現在竟然為了控告勞工,編列了2千萬預算……

Isn’t it CLA’s responsibility to take care of labours’ right?
On the contrary, CLA is asking a budget of 20 million to sue these labourers…