All the unfounded "evidence" Ma Ying-jeou used to attack the DPP on 6/4 (Part Two!)

Does this look like the face of a liar to you?

(Yes.)

It's easy to spout bullshit. It's easy to lie, or take a kernel of truth and present a slanted and ultimately inaccurate perspective on it, calling your take the real truth. It's been done since the birth of political discourse because it's efficient, it's simple, and people will believe you.

What takes a long time? Refuting someone else's lies and bad takes. That requires reams of free time and tracts of verbiage. 

Fortunately, I type fast and am in quarantine, and a blog has no word limits. Why not debunk every accusation Ma Ying-jeou hurled at the DPP in his offensive post on June 4th? Sure, he briefly mentioned the Tiananmen Square Massacre, but it's clear what he really wanted to do was compliment Xi Jinping and trash his own country's democracy and elected leader. 

At least, he wanted to trash Taiwan's democracy. I'm reasonably sure he believes that China is his country and Xi Jinping currently leads it. 

Regardless, the crux of his argument is worth refuting point-by-point. Much of what he references was barely covered in English-language media, if at all. He uses specific terms even the most fluent second-language Mandarin speakers might be unfamiliar with (I know I was). And there are people who will believe it. 

I discuss the entirety of his statement in my previous post. Here, I'll address the specifics, starting with the middle of the post where he goes into detail.

Although Taiwan still flies the banner of democracy, under the Democratic Progressive Party's governance, it has gradually slid into "unfree democracy":  closing television news stations, liquidating opposition parties, "checking the water meter" of the people [this is a slang term], interfering with the judiciary,  an all-around 'greening' [turning pro-DPP] of independent agencies, revising the law to exonerate the corrupt former president [Chen Shui-bian], using internal propaganda to mislead citizens and sowing hatred simply to follow the 'political correctness' of the so-called 'anti-China protection of Taiwan'. International public opinion turns a blind eye to these initiatives, which harm Taiwan's freedom and democracy, but I am deeply concerned.

There's a lot to cover here, so let's go point-by-point, news item by news item.

"Closing television news stations"

The television station in question is CTiTV, which has severe editorial integrity issues and has been known to broadcast disinformation.  

It was done because they breached regulations several times and were routinely broadcasting false information without fact-checking. They were also found to lack editorial independence from their owner, pro-China Tsai tycoon Tsai Eng-meng, whose Want Want group receives funding from China. Want Want China Times Media Group (of which CTiTV is/was a part) was also accused of taking orders directly from the Chinese government. The original Financial Times piece is here, but paywalled.

Even if you oppose the closing of CTiTV, it wasn't done to crush dissenting voices. Plenty of pan-blue networks are still on television, and CTiTV is still alive on Youtube. While other networks may have fact-checking, editorial and general quality issues (including pan-green ones, which are hardly a bastion of fantastic journalism), CTiTV is the only one the NCC has actually refused a license renewal to. Typically a network won't fall afoul of the NCC if they plausibly believed false information was true at the time it was broadcast.

Some critical responses to this incident described Taiwan's media environment as being solidly "green" -- Han Kuo-yu even stated that "90% of media is pan-green" during the 2020 election -- and taken CTiTV's downfall as a harbinger of some sort of authoritarian DPP crackdown. That's simply not the case. It's true that by viewership the pan-green channels dominate (at about 66% as per the above link), but that doesn't mean that pro-DPP news channels are the only choice; it means more people choose to watch them.

In other words, it's possible to sincerely disagree on the NCC's decision, but it's not possible to credibly call this a grab to dominate the media or a sign of "Green Terror". 


"Liquidating opposition parties"

This probably has to do with transitional justice. Essentially, Ma is saying here that money the KMT can be credibly accused of stealing over the decades of its brutal, corrupt, totalitarian rule should not be taken from the KMT and given back to the nation it was stolen from. Not great.

"Checking the water meter"

This is Internet slang for the police entering a home on false pretexts, for example, to say that the home's water meter needs to be checked when it doesn't. It's also a catch-all for general intimidation of anyone who opposes you -- usually through a real-life visit -- while making excuses for your presence. 

The KMT likes to complain about this -- Alex Tsai at one point said it would lead to a modern Wuchang Uprising which...what? At first I thought it was pure projection: one thing I've learned in life is that people who make preposterous accusations against others either have engaged in those actions themselves, or want to. If someone (or a group) is screaming "all these bad actors are doing this to me!" but offers little evidence that it's happening, chances are they're the ones actually doing it, and trying to deflect scrutiny. 

Certainly, when I think of police intimidation to quell political dissent, the KMT has far more of a historical legacy. There is flimsy evidence for the existence of a "Green Terror", but the "White Terror" is a matter of historical fact. And frankly, even in modern times the KMT is not blameless.

However, a few cases did pop up after a search. Apparently some police showed up at a KMT think tank symposium saying protests could break out as the discussions were related to upcoming referendums, and protests were happening elsewhere. The KMT insists it wasn't a public event and only the press was notified, calling the excuse for the police presence "farfetched". In another incident, an elderly woman was visited by police after posting disinformation about the then-upcoming 2020 election.

Neither of these incidents, if true, looks great. However, the symposium was not stopped and no one was arrested or harmed. (I also couldn't find any proof that there's some DPP-led crackdown on freedom of expression). The woman was asked to explain her post at a police station in accordance with the Social Order Maintenance Act -- not great, as authorities paying someone a personal visit over something they've said sends a specific kind of message given Taiwan's political history -- but as far as I can tell was not arrested or further troubled. 

While the DPP is hardly perfect and their methods of handling disinformation potentially problematic, neither of these incidents definitively proves that the DPP is turning Taiwan into an "unfree democracy" or instituting a reign of "Green Terror". 


"Interfering with the judiciary" and "turning independent agencies green"

These accusations are more vague, but seem to refer to a variety of issues. This KMT News Network post is barely readable (no, it's not a machine translation) but provides little actual evidence of judicial interference, stopping at an insistence that it is happening. The KMT took a comment about the "Political Investigation Office" out of context in regards to the recent by-election between gangter Yen Ching-piao's son and DPP candidate Lin Jingyi -- there appears to be a lot of booming anger but very little actual evidence that anything illegal took place.

In terms of that "all-around greening of independent agencies", there have been a few accusations of nepotistic activity in various agencies, and an insistence that the NCC (the agency that revoked CTiTV's license, discussed above) has been "turned green" -- all with very little proof. 

I'm not saying that the DPP is perfect and incorruptible; that would be risible. All parties do unsavory things. However, when it comes to these specific accusations, I don't see much there.

"Revising the law to exonerate the corrupt former president"

This is getting very long, so I recommend reading the Taipei Times coverage of this issue if you want to know more. I'm not going to opine on whether the law being amended is actually unclear, or the types public funds in question are functionally the same, as I'm not an expert in that area. I'm also not going to spend a lot of time discussing Chen Shui-bian, as that's old news. 

Sure, it doesn't look great to change a law in a way that would exonerate someone convicted of corruption from your own party, although the KMT hardly has a spotless history when it comes to corruption and inappropriate use of funds (that's why the Ill-Gotten Assets Committee exists), and the article notes that they've done the same thing:

While saying that the KMT set a bad legal precedent in 2013 by amending the same article to exonerate former KMT legislator Yen Ching-piao (顏清標) from allegations of misappropriating public funds, the NPP said the DPP yesterday again set a bad precedent by forcibly passing the bill at the legislature.

 

Think what you like about Ma's accusation here, but remember that he's probably not too interested in discussing the KMT's similar political maneuvers.

"Using internal propaganda to mislead citizens and sowing hatred simply to follow the 'political correctness' of the so-called 'anti-China protection of Taiwan"

Look, honestly, this just sounds like mad ranting. There's no actual accusation here: Ma is just mad that society rejects his and the KMT's insistence that Taiwan is Chinese and should embrace a Chinese identity. They don't want to admit that the CCP is a threat to Taiwan and attempts at warming relations with them will only hand them opportunities to render Taiwan economically dependent on and politically tied to China, making a move away from unification more difficult. 

They simply cannot accept that Taiwanese do not think they are Taiwanese and that this angers China, and the DPP acknowledges and works with these facts. Acknowledging the general consensus on Taiwanese identity is apparently "propaganda" and being pragmatic on the threat of invasion from China is "politically correct" maneuvering to make Taiwan "anti-China". 

The KMT will never admit that their own forcing of Chinese identity -- including the attempted destruction of the Taiwanese language in favor of Mandarin -- onto an island they occupied was the "internal propaganda" they speak of. They'll never admit that the social change toward Taiwanese identity took place before the DPP took power in 2016, and in fact spiked when Taiwan fully democratized and grew throughout Ma's own administration. They'll never admit that China is a threat, not a friend. And certainly they'll never admit that Taiwanese by and large do not want to be part of China. They'll never admit that their own attempts to force Taiwanese to identify as Chinese failed, and are unlikely to succeed in the future.

There is literally nothing else there, so let's move on.

Furthermore, the coronavirus pandemic has shown over the past two years that the government has not done enough to procure vaccines, and their chaotic 'rapid screening' policies show that the government's "proactive deployment" is a falsehood.  DPP leaders and the so-called "1450" [the so-called DPP "Internet army", named for an amount of money said to be allocated toward cultivating it] attack and discredit any critics [the actual phrase is "smear red"].  

I discussed these particular distortions in my previous post, but I think they belong here as well, so I'll quote myself in green:

 

I'll admit that Taiwan's pandemic response has not been perfect in every aspect, at all times. There have been poor decisions, politically-motivated choices and lags. However, I'd describe the overall pandemic response as sterling -- no, gold standard. Anyone who thinks that Taiwan did a poor job handling the pandemic is straight-up full of it. All you need to do is look at how the entire rest of the world save possibly New Zealand handled it. Most accusations to the contrary distort what actually went on with the early vaccine purchases or blow up small mistakes into catastrophic ones. Most of it is based on lies.

As for the "1450" Internet troll army, well, I'm sure every party has people working on influencing public conversation. I won't pretend it's beyond the pale to say the DPP has one (and the KMT surely has one too -- I recall an ad surfacing years ago promising free bento boxes to attendees of a seminar on how to post online to bolster the KMT's image, but can't find a link).

That said, I can't find any proof that the "1450" army actually exists, and it would be very weird to allocate such funds through the Council of Agriculture, no? What's more, people decrying the "1450" have been known to misattribute the origin of the phrase to mean NT$1,450 paid to each Internet troll working for the DPP. 

Basically, there are a lot of accusations and very little proof here.

In sum, Taiwan actually has done an overall excellent job handling the pandemic. When you see people online praising that, it's because there's good reason to do so. If the KMT is sore that it's not very popular now, perhaps they should look at their own poor governance and attempts to force Taiwan toward closer relations with China. 

That is to say, there's nothing here but more distortion, including some statements that I suspect are outright lies.

When we shouted that the opposition should be treated kindly in order to establish core values in common on both sides of the strait, the ruling party is suppressing or even eliminating dissidents, while falling into "unfree democracy" and "elected dictatorship." 

 

Ah yes, because the KMT is renowned for always being so kind to the opposition. They were so friendly when they threw the Tangwai in jail. Their torture and interrogation techniques were employed in an attempt to establish core values in common! The KMT has never, ever attempted to "suppress or even eliminate dissidents", the White Terror is called that because it was just very bright outside for decades!

Obviously, there is no evidence -- I don't even have a link -- that the DPP is doing this. I discussed the inclusion of "cross strait common values" and the impossibility of an "elected dictatorship" in my previous post and won't repeat them here. 

Needless to say, this is the part of his argument that slides from plausible, debatable issue into lies and hokum.

Not just hokum, but more projection. Didn't the KMT spend decades during Martial Law lying about how the ideals of the Republic of China included democracy, while not instituting democracy beyond the local level in which every candidate was KMT-approved?

When someone like Ma bangs on and on about what the other guy is doing, you can be pretty sure he's done it, or he's aware that the KMT has. What was it that someone said on Twitter? Every KMT accusation is a confession? Like that.

Liars like Ma follow a second pattern, in my experience: they start out with claims that, while refutable, are based on real events or issues. You have to take time and energy to actually refute them. So if you know they're garbage, you ignore them, but if you don't, you might well believe it. In any case, at least some of them might be up for some kind of real debate, even if the actual claim made by that person is fundamentally flawed. 

Then, after you've been tired out, they go for vague accusations and outright bullshit. In other words, there's a veneer of plausibility to start out, which gradually drops as the case being made grows more and more deranged. 

If you ever find yourself reading something that starts out sounding pretty good, makes a few questionable claims that are nevertheless worthy of discussion, and then devolves down the road to Crazytown, be suspicious. This is a perfect example.

🎵 Ma Ying-jeou is a sack of trash 🎶 (Part One!)

This is the first of a two-parter. You can read the deep dive into Ma's actual claims here.

I was going to write a post going after an issue I'm angry about in a sort of general, ambient sense. But this other morsel of news I'm also angry about is timely, so at the risk of blogging only when I'm angry about something, here goes.

Yesterday was June 4th, the 33rd anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. Certainly, in Taiwan and around the world, politicians who put out statements about Tiananmen anniversaries generally avoid the overtly offensive. Some are sharp criticisms, whereas the worst of them are simply too anodyne. 

Take President Tsai's Facebook post for example. She touched on how Taiwanese people and their leaders, as in any democracy, hold a variety of opinions that don't always agree, but can hopefully be united through transparency, sincerity and communication. She touched on the crackdowns in Hong Kong, saying they won't destroy the memories of the people. Perhaps it wasn't necessary to talk about the pandemic and vaccines, but overall it's a perfectly acceptable statement.

Then there's former president and human dingleberry Ma Ying-jeou. I started out calling him a "garbage person" but honestly, I don't want to insult Taiwan's hardworking sanitation professionals by implying their necessary and respectable jobs might also describe such a man.

Ma spent most of it trashing the democratically-elected government of his own country, and included some brief praise -- yes, praise -- of genocidal dictator Xi Jinping. In this swash of effluent, he added a few admonitions that June 4th should be recognized and "rehabilitated", with vaguely-defined addressees. In other words, there are a few okay sentences in a big ol' gurgle of vomit. 

I'm not a professional translator and Mandarin isn't my first language, but I'll take a stab at parsing what he said in English. I think this is important because, having checked the machine translations available from Facebook and Google, the former is unreadable and the latter, while okay, will be unclear to anyone unfamiliar with the issues Ma touches on.

I've broken his words down into chunks for analysis. It's easier this way, and anyway "chunks" are a good descriptor of what Ma is spewing. At the end we'll look at why his post matters at all. 

Today marks the 33rd anniversary of the June 4th Incident. On the one hand, I once again call on the mainland authorities to courageously face history and accept responsibility so as to move forward. On the other hand, I also feel the need to use this opportunity to reflect on the fact that although Taiwan claims to be a "democracy", it is slipping step by step into "unfree democracy." It's highly worthy of vigilance.

This paragraph is hardly the worst. Note however that Ma calls on "the mainland authorities" to recognize the Tiananmen Square massacre. Yes, the use of "mainland authorities" is a huge eye-roll -- not the Chinese government, and nobody in particular -- but is expected coming from him. He'll continue the trend of calling China "the mainland" throughout the post. 

I can't imagine why he would think the Tiananmen Square Massacre deserves to be "one hand" of a larger argument -- it stands alone as its own issue -- but this is Ma Ying-jeou. 

I noticed that he couldn't even use the words "Tiananmen Square", let alone "massacre." Tsai also calls what happened an "incident" (a common way of naming historical atrocities in Mandarin), but at least she uses the word "Tiananmen." That's nothing, however, compared to the straight-up offensiveness of using June 4th as an opportunity to rant about how "on the other hand" Taiwan is so "undemocratic" that it deserves more space in a post about Tiananmen Square than the actual Tiananmen Square! 

As a quick reminder, Taiwan is consistently near the top of democracy rankings in Asia and the world. Ma alone is screaming into the wind that Taiwan is somehow unfree. 

Note as well that this "unfree democracy" tripe is one of Ma's common refrains; this isn't nearly the first time he's used it. It's pretty ironic, isn't it, that Ma is able to go online on social media from Taiwan and say whatever he likes about Taiwan, including scathing (if untrue) criticisms about its government, overall level of freedom, and ruling party. It's almost as if he has the freedom to talk about this issue. Huh! 

The world is unsettled lately. The trade war launched by the US against the mainland in 2018, the explosion of the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, and the Russia-Ukraine War that began in February affect global peace and stability at each step. Therefore, I would like to remind the mainland that although the so-called "anti-China" trend initiated by the United States has complicated the situation, that the mainland can turn passivity into action and send a more positive message to the rest of the world.

So instead of talking about Tiananmen Square in a post ostensibly about Tiananmen Square, Ma decides in the second paragraph to attack the United States for starting a "trade war". I don't want to throw the Trump administration even the tiniest of bones, but was it a trade war, or was it the US finally standing up to China's unsavory trade practices, IP theft, tendency to tear up any agreements it doesn't like and realization that dealing with genocidaires is maybe a bad thing?

What's more, isn't his own party trying to rebuild friendly ties in the United States by opening a representative office, after ceding so much political ground to the DPP there? Isn't KMT chair Eric Chu there right now? It's not just offensive (and parroting the language of the CCP on US-China ties) but politically unwise to write a post about Tiananmen, and then use it to attack the United States right now. Is he trying to sabotage his own party, or does he assume this is vitriol for a purely domestic market -- that nobody in the US will pay attention to his words?

Anti-Asian hate crimes against individuals are indeed a problem, and certainly Trump harmed rather than helped in this regard. That said, the Chinese government bears responsibility for its own poor image as an institution in the United States and beyond.

Notice as well that he addresses this to unnamed authorities "on the mainland", not any specific leader or government body. Rather than scathing criticism, it reads as "c'mon you guys, all you gotta do is just recognize this so you can put a positive image out there!" 

Commentators kinder than me might call this diplomatic. I call it overly-gentle and downright delusional.

In October last year, Mr. Xi Jinping, the mainland leader, spoke of democracy at Central People's Congress Work Conference, extolling the principle that the people hold all the power in the country, and that as masters of the country they rule it to the greatest extent possible.  I sincerely believe this is the right direction to build a society with rule of law. If the trauma of June 4th can be truly faced and dealt with [rehabilitated], not only will it project a good image internationally, but it will cause the two sides of the strait to cease moving further and further apart.

By the third paragraph, he's praising Xi Jinping for his words and "the right direction" he's taking. This compliment is the only time he will address Xi by name in the entire post.

Nevermind that Xi's words are a straight-up lie: people in China hold none of the power, they are not the masters of their country and they don't rule it to any extent. Ma surely knows this, but he never lets an opportunity to bestow some compliments on Xi no matter how inappropriate the timing, and how inaccurate the compliment. This can't be the "right direction" if Xi literally isn't doing what he says here, and is straight-up lying! Which he of course is, and Ma knows he is. Indeed, taking the time in a post about Tiananmen Square to praise Xi Jinping is easily the most offensive part of this whole thing.

Not only that, he's praising Xi Jinping for talking about democracy and governance by the people! In a post about the anniversary of Tiananmen Square! What in the actual name of Jesus is going on here?

To quote respected activist figure Chou I-cheng, Ma can praise Xi and denounce Taiwan's democracy if he wants, but it's particularly disgusting to do so on such a significant day.

He adds at the end that such a recognition might bring "the two sides of the strait" (note: not "China and Taiwan" because he doesn't recognize Taiwan's sovereignty) closer together. Which perhaps it could, but the gulf between the two nations exists not just because of June 4th, and not just because China isn't a democracy, but because China wants to subjugate Taiwan -- and Taiwan does not and will never want to be annexed by China. 

Nevertheless, what does democracy mean when the two sides of the strait have different systems, their narratives and practices are different. Beyond appealing to the mainland, we should also turn inward and examine our own democratic development more carefully.

Democracy means the thing that Taiwan has where the people elect their leaders and have human rights, including the freedom to criticize and remove those leaders. It also means the thing China doesn't have. 

It's inappropriate and offensive to attack Taiwan in a post that purports to be about events that took place in China, especially as Taiwan is indeed democratic and China is not. 

Reading it, you'd almost think China wasn't so bad but Taiwan was a mess, when the opposite is true. 

Although Taiwan still flies the banner of democracy, under the Democratic Progressive Party's governance, it has gradually slid into "unfree democracy":  closing television news stations, liquidating opposition parties, "checking the water meter" of the people [this is a slang term], interfering with the judiciary,  an all-around 'greening' [turning pro-DPP] of independent agencies, revising the law to exonerate the corrupt former president [Chen Shui-bian], using internal propaganda to mislead citizens and sowing hatred simply to follow the 'political correctness' of the so-called 'anti-China protection of Taiwan'. International public opinion turns a blind eye to these initiatives, which harm Taiwan's freedom and democracy, but I am deeply concerned.

I have so much to say about this litany of accusations against the DPP.  In fact, I dive into it here.

Each is worth diving into for several reasons: they provide the "evidence" for Ma's perspective and case against the DPP in the most detail, they're commonly reported in Chinese-language media but not so much in English, and they form the backbone of the DPP's argument for why they're better leaders than the DPP.

They're mostly bullshit -- though the most plausible ones are listed first -- but breaking down why each one is indeed its own uniquely-shaped steaming turd will take a lot of time and verbiage.

It's fascinating how Ma tries to claim the high ground and make it look like he has a detailed and multi-faceted case against the Tsai administration, which is mostly founded on a heaping pile of garbage.

Finally, he seems upset that the international community has a generally positive view of Taiwan (or that understanding of and sympathy for Taiwan is growing among Western nations). Why? Does he want the world to think Taiwan is a shithole? Does he want everyone to disparage Taiwanese democracy the way he does? 

Furthermore, the coronavirus pandemic has shown over the past two years that the government has not done enough to procure vaccines, and their chaotic 'rapid screening' policies show that the government's "proactive deployment" is a falsehood.  DPP leaders and the so-called "1450" [the so-called DPP "Internet army", named for an amount of money said to be allocated toward cultivating it] attack and discredit any critics [the actual phrase is "smear red"].  

I'll admit that Taiwan's pandemic response has not been perfect in every aspect, at all times. There have been poor decisions, politically-motivated choices and lags. However, I'd describe the overall pandemic response as sterling -- no, gold standard. Anyone who thinks that Taiwan did a poor job handling the pandemic is straight-up full of it. All you need to do is look at how the entire rest of the world save possibly New Zealand handled it. Most accusations to the contrary distort what actually went on with the early vaccine purchases or blow up small mistakes into catastrophic ones. Most of it is based on lies.

As for the "1450" Internet troll army, well, I'm sure every party has people working on influencing public conversation. I won't pretend it's beyond the pale to say the DPP has one (and the KMT surely has one too -- I recall an ad surfacing years ago promising free bento boxes to attendees of a seminar on how to post online to bolster the KMT's image, but can't find a link).

That said, I can't find any proof that the "1450" army actually exists, and it would be very weird to allocate such funds through the Council of Agriculture, no? What's more, people decrying the "1450" have been known to misattribute the origin of the phrase to mean NT$1,450 paid to each Internet troll working for the DPP. 

Basically, there are a lot of accusations and very little proof here.

In sum, Taiwan actually has done an overall excellent job handling the pandemic. When you see people online praising that, it's because there's good reason to do so. If the KMT is sore that it's not very popular now, perhaps they should look at their own poor governance and attempts to force Taiwan toward closer relations with China. 

When we shouted that the opposition should be treated kindly in order to establish core values in common on both sides of the strait, the ruling party is suppressing or even eliminating dissidents, while falling into "unfree democracy" and "elected dictatorship." 

I have more to say here, but I'll save that for my next post.

Obviously, there is no evidence -- I don't even have a link -- that the DPP is doing this. Name one dissident who has been "suppressed" or "eliminated" by the DPP. 

Now, how many dissidents has the KMT suppressed or eliminated in its history?

There ya go.

There are two more points worth making here: first, tying "finding common core values" to "cross-strait relations". This implies that Ma's complaint isn't that the DPP hasn't tried to find common ground with the KMT -- it's hard to say whether they have or not, as the KMT doesn't seem very interested in finding common ground with them -- but rather that they haven't tried to find common ground with the Chinese government.

This is, of course, a euphemism for refusing to engage in talks that are aimed at eventual unification between Taiwan and China, or a recognition of the (fabricated) 1992 Consensus. It means that the DPP can't and won't work with China's insistence that all negotiations and discussions must begin with mutual agreement that Taiwan is part of China and Taiwanese people are Chinese.

Which they can't -- Taiwan isn't part of China, Taiwanese mostly don't identify as Chinese, and it goes against both the public consensus and the DPP's ethos. That's literally the whole point.

That line about "elected dictatorship" is another howler, barely worth acknowledging: there is no such thing as an elected dictatorship. It's possible for democracies to be less free or even unfree -- and there is such a thing as a sham democracy (I mean, even Vladimir Putin gets "elected"). But there is no such thing as an elected dictator. If you are elected and you can be removed, you might have authoritarian tendencies, but you are not a "dictator". 

On the 33rd anniversary of June 4th, we hope that the mainland will face history and move forward, but we cannot sit idly by and watch Taiwan's democracy fall backward, or advance toward "unfree democracy" and "elected dictatorship." We must begin with ourselves and defend Taiwan's true democracy.

There's not much to analyze here: this paragraph just concludes the post and re-iterates the justification for using a post about Tiananmen Square to attack the Tsai government, Taiwanese democracy and the general trend away from identification with Chinese nationhood and ideals in Taiwan.

It is worth discussing why this matters, however. Who cares about this old fuckbucket's post? 

Well, first of all, because the media is paying attention. New Talk posted Su Tseng-chang's response calling his words a "laughingstock". KMT-friendly outlet United Daily News, widely seen as reputable, simply reposted it without comment. People predisposed towards pan-blue sentiments will read that and not see all the problems inherent in his post, or question whether it's appropriate to use the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre to attack their own government, implying that China might move in the right direction (and indeed is, according to Ma, already doing so) and Taiwan is the real authoritarian state. 

What's more, Ma still unfortunately holds a hell of a lot of power in the KMT, keeping it from reforming into a party Taiwanese might actually want to vote for (that is, one not so laser-focused on insisting Taiwan is Chinese and the CCP is a friendly government and good-faith negotiator when it is clearly neither). He's very good at rhetoric -- I might think his post is a steaming turdpile, but I have to admit it's a well-written turdpile -- he's pulling a hell of a lot of strings in the KMT, and he's probably not going away. He almost certainly has a hand in the general tenor and perspective the KMT wants to project into the world and Taiwan.

That's a shame, as he seems to have nothing useful, inspirational, thoughtful or even truthful to offer.

What is going on with the KMT's foreign language social media people?

Earlier today, activist and journalist Roy Ngerng wrote a fairly anodyne tweet about how the Tsai government had "built Taiwan's relationship with other democracies" so that Japan and the US were aiding Taiwan quickly, without Taiwan having to surrender its sovereignty or dignity to China. 

The Kuomintang, on their official account, responded the way a CCP sock puppet might -- as you can see from the cover photo.

It's already in the local news, where you can also see some of the more polite replies. 

At first, I believed it was most likely a trigger-happy intern who had forgotten to log in to their personal account and accidentally went after Ngerng on the KMT's official account. That in itself should be enough to get them fired. At best, it meant that this was the kind of person the KMT employed: willing to spew hateful word salad co-opting the social justice language of the left to make nonsense arguments, and not able to make a particularly coherent case.

What's more, the language read exactly like the CCP's United Front and fifty-cent bots, as many pointed out:

The entire comment is incoherent -- calling Ngerng, who is not white, a white supremacist for talking about help that Japan (a non-white country) and the US gave to Taiwan. It's not worth analyzing very deeply, but the part about anime in particular is as questionable as it is incoherent. There are entire subreddits full of people who believe all anime is pornography (so, My Neighbor Totoro is...huh?), but even if that were true, it's irrelevant here. 

There's another less popular line of thinking that anime is some sort of artistic way for Japanese, who want to fantasize about being "more Western" without having to say so, to enjoy and imagine themselves as having "Westernized" bodies and forms through anime. This could what be what our questionable tweeter meant: that one might answer "you're accusing me of white supremacy, but Japan's not white", with a prepackaged "they wish they were white and that's white supremacy, because anime!" retort.

The whole argument is of course pure bullshit, but it could be what he meant (I am almost certain the rogue tweeter is a 'he', because the entire International Department is male, as we'll discuss below). It sounds like the sort of pseudo-intellectual trash one might pick up in the same discussion spaces where one picks up phrasing like "muh Japan".

In any case, that's the best possible scenario. 

At worst, it implied that the KMT hired one or several people to manage its social media whose other job was to operate horrible troll accounts that spew this kind of rhetoric in an attempt to ruin any attempt at meaningful discourse while being completely impossible to argue with. This is an intentional tactic that political interests pay for -- especially the CCP -- and it is so toxic and oxygen-sucking, it's like trying to duel with quicksand.

I'm not sure it matters if there is one person or many working for the KMT to engage in this sort of discourse online. I'm not sure it matters if this was meant to be a personal tweet posted from the wrong account. Whoever wrote that tweet has exposed themselves as having a vicious, angry and problematic personality who is willing to deal with people in the exact same way as a pro-CCP troll might. The KMT hired them anyway.

What's more, the KMT has previously made statements in support of US-Taiwan ties and thanked Japan for their donation of over a million vaccines. So, such a jaw-dropping, unprofessional response by an official organization to a fairly benign tweet is...eyebrow-raising. It just doesn't make sense. 

Within 45 minutes the tweet was gone, and a poorly-worded "sorry if you were offended" apology posted by the official account. That reply was also deleted and re-posted:

To be fair, the original "apology" had a typo in it, and the new post fixed that. The goal might not have been to delete all the angry replies. That was the effect, however.

This got me wondering: what is going on in the International Affairs department of the KMT? Because either they're running a whole online troll operation, there's a massive internal tug-of-war, or they have at least one reckless person who can't do their job properly, and who holds some pretty horrifying views. 

Of course, it's not hard to find out who works in this department of the KMT. Lee Ta-jung is the director, and is associated with Tamkang University. There's nothing odd there. Shen Cheng-hao doesn't have much going on either. He appears here with his colleague (whom I'll talk about in a minute) on a show about how the youth feel about the US election, but frankly, I haven't watched the whole thing. Ho Chih-yung has ties to the National Policy Research Foundation and National Tsinghua University. Although I doubt I'd agree with any of these guys -- and yes, they are all men -- on political issues, they don't seem like people who would log into the KMT's official Twitter account to incoherently harass a journalist over an anodyne tweet.

Then there's Tang Cheng-wei. Here he is -- again in the local media ETToday -- making sexist remarks about President Tsai on a Taiwan News article about her winning the John McCain prize. He insulted her by calling her a virgin, and a loyal dog of the US. Seeing as until very recently the US seemed to prefer the KMT, that's an odd comment. He also insulted others who disagreed with him:

It's interesting to me that he wonders why people would bring up the KMT, when he works (or worked) for the KMT. 

Anyway, he continues with his anti-West, anti-foreigner talk:

He also implied that respected writer and analyst J. Michael Cole is a "Canadian spy" hired by President Tsai for that reason (Cole stopped running Thinking Taiwan when Tsai was elected, and there is no indication that he used his previous intelligence training in that role. He is open about his previous intelligence career).

This is strange disinformation to spread by someone working for the KMT, as the KMT insists that the DPP is the one spreading fake news.

Update 6/12/2021: Interestingly, this is all breaking now, even though his comments were made a month ago. The local reports don't connect him to Thursday's tweet, however, and say he stopped working for the KMT in March to do military service. That's odd. These are all from the past few days -- you can find them yourself if you'd like. I've included a screenshot to show you how recent all of this news is:

The only report of his comments about Tsai that dates from the actual event just calls him a "former" consultant and offers no other details. While I am fairly sure when I read that article two days ago it didn't say he was a "former" anything, I could be mistaken. It's also possible my memory is correct but the writer was wrong. The article about the "International War Room" is from February. 

I cannot offer any interpretation of this; I'll just leave it here for you.

Furthermore, Tang's anti-foreigner behavior is interesting, for someone who wrote at great length about how great America is on his own Facebook page in 2018: 

...I'm not going to bother with screenshots of the whole thing.

America is a diverse and multicultural country, while also being majority-white. How does this square with his anti-foreigner comments a month ago?

Remember, this person is (or was) partly responsible for KMT outreach to foreigners. Why would the KMT hire someone who hates white people to help them try to appeal to the rest of the world? I mean, I get that white supremacy is a massive problem, but if your goal is international outreach, this isn't how you do it.

He mentioned in the video above that he's a Trump supporter. This should not matter in relation to the issue at hand, but Trump himself is associated with white supremacy and "America First!" rhetoric, so it's a mismatch with his anti-foreigner, "loyal dog to the US" stance on President Tsai if he supports a strong US otherwise. 

This is a person the KMT chose to take on in their International Affairs department. This is a person they entrusted with part of their goal of international and foreign-language outreach. 

A known (former?) employee of the KMT making online comments about the president of the nation -- childish, trollish, sexist and highly inappropriate given his job -- should be enough to raise questions. 

Of course, Tang has the same right to freedom of expression as anyone else. Nobody is going to arrest him over his horrible comments about Tsai. But freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences, and others have just as much right to point out that his personal comments don't look good when you consider his job. If I go online as Jenna and say "X", and someone writes about how the woman behind Lao Ren Cha said "X", that's all within the bounds of freedom of expression. The same applies here.

To be clear, we don't know who was behind the offensive and frankly uncalled-for and line-crossing tweet to Ngerng; perhaps it truly was an intern, and if so, I can only hope that that intern has been fired already. That tweet happened on Thursday, so whoever wrote it still had access to the KMT's official account just a few days ago. That is not acceptable.

However, regardless of who wrote that tweet today, one thing is clear: the KMT has in its employ at least one (and possibly several) highly problematic people who are causing multiple embarrassments, and who perhaps are not the best choices for communicating with the English-speaking public or representing the party. If they want to be taken seriously as the opposition, and maintain a dignified online presence, they really must do better than this. 

Today's tweet -- whomever wrote it -- crossed a line. Tang's comments about Tsai last month crossed a line. How many lines must be crossed before they address what is obviously a recurring problem?

A Taxonomy of Lies about Taiwan's Vaccine Situation

Razor blades in candy were always an urban legend, but I wouldn't take China's candy

Trust me, nobody wants to talk about a different topic more than me, but as long as disinformation is permeating discussions about vaccine access in Taiwan, it's important to make sure reasonable clarifications are available in English. 

I want to start by saying that I understand there is a lot of fear and anxiety right now. There's an outbreak in Taiwan that, while not growing exponentially, is still growing. It is probably controllable over a period of months, but that still means several months of worry, doubt, admonitions to stay home, and yes, some deaths. Hospitals are strained. There's a global vaccine shortage in most countries, while the US is flush with doses, and other countries have struggled to obtain them. 

That's a worrying situation to be in, and I don't want to diminish it even as I repeat my message to not freak out. 

It also presents a window: a time when Taiwan is trying to manage its outbreak while attempting to obtain vaccines which are in short supply globally. Eventually, Taiwan will get this under control and vaccines will be available, but we're looking at a timeline of months. That gives malicious actors plenty of time to disseminate disinformation, and for those lies to fester. And some unsavory political elements are trying to use that window to sow distrust in the Taiwanese government -- specifically Tsai and the DPP -- while calling for cooperation on the surface. These same elements turn and point fingers at the Tsai government for "playing politics". 

Anxious people may believe things that give them an outlet for their stress, so I'm not writing this to belittle anyone. It's pretty normal human behavior, and not all believers in disinformation are ill-intentioned. I do believe people are glomming on to this "we want BNT" storyline because it represents a type of hope. They want vaccines and these seem available. They're not, but that doesn't mean those who misplace their hope in these vaccines are bad, or wrong, and I don't intend to imply otherwise.

Rather, I just want to create a clear record in English to prevent further misdirection.

Let's take a look at each of these false claims about Taiwan's vaccine situation in turn, and then hopefully leave the topic behind for good. 


The national government is unfairly blocking local governments from obtaining vaccines on their own

The story here is that the CECC said earlier in May that cities and municipalities could procure vaccines on their own if they wished, and people are complaining that the CECC is "now" insisting that only the national government can procure vaccines.

This is genuinely confusing, so I don't blame anyone who perhaps skimmed this news believes that this is  a course reversal or about-face meant to take power away from local governments. 

The key point, however, is that the vaccines these local governments could potentially buy, and the distributors that sell them, still need to have been approved by the central government before the purchases can take place, and the batches themselves also need to be tested. This is usually done by the central government, and then after given the all-clear, a municipality could theoretically purchase these drugs on their own.

The central government noted, however, that the procurement procedures were complex and cumbersome, and would probably be challenging for a city to pull off on their own. Imagine if, say, Nantou City approached BioNTech, which rebuffed the Taiwanese government, or called up Moderna, which sold doses to Taiwan which are coming late due to a global shortage. What leverage does Nantou City have that Taiwan doesn't? Why would those companies sell to Nantou, not Taiwan? Do they have the resources to get through the procedure in the first place?

However unlikely, in theory, I suppose it could be done. 

The issue here is that the local governments trying to "buy their own doses" now aren't talking about buying approved batches from approved distributors. They're talking about the Shanghai Fosun doses, and Shanghai Fosun has not applied for approval to distribute their product in Taiwan. Therefore, they're not approved, and municipal governments cannot buy from them.

Hence, the government is clarifying that locally-procured doses and the brokers who sell them still have to go through the same Taiwan FDA approval process as everyone else. 

This limitation also applies to Terry Gou, who says he wants to purchase ten million vaccine doses. If he can do that through an approved channel and get those doses to the government for the required batch testing, then fine. It'd prove that the government could just throw around cold, hard cash -- but fine. 

However, if he thinks he can just buy whatever from any channel he likes and get those doses in Taiwanese arms without the usual approval process, he's dreaming.

By the way, there's an update to the Terry Gou story: the game continues. It turns out manufacturers don't want to sell to these various non-government-affiliated parties.

If these municipalities truly wanted to approach approved channels to purchase more vaccines on their own, I'd be very interested to hear the whether the CECC's answer might change given recent political hassles. It would actually make sense to centralize one's vaccine strategy given the current crisis to ensure the fairest possible distribution, but I hope the CECC would make that clear.

Tsai and the DPP are trying to keep out foreign vaccines to 'protect' the market for the Taiwanese-made vaccine 

This is obviously untrue. In fact, I'll go ahead and say it's a blatant lie. 

If it were true, why has Taiwan spent the better part of a year trying to negotiate for every foreign vaccine they can get their hands on, from AstraZeneca to Moderna to BioNTech -- millions of doses in all?

If uptake on these doses has been slow, it's because there's a global vaccine shortage and massive inequities in availability (the US, for example, clearly has plenty), and ordered shipments are taking longer to fulfill. Plus, it is absolutely plausible that China has been blocking Taiwan's attempts to secure vaccines. Taiwan only implied this before; now they've come right out and said it's the case. It has nothing to do with trying to 'protect' a local product. 

If the government were trying to 'protect' the market to ensure the domestically-produced Taiwan vaccine has enough takers, first, that would entail endangering lives and a full-blown COVID health system breakdown to possibly make money later on.

The Taiwanese government isn't perfect, but I highly doubt they'd do that -- you'd have to think of them as monsters. They're imperfect, but they're not monsters. (China, on the other hand, absolutely would do that to Taiwan and the CCP is indeed run by monstrous people). 

This "insider trading on the local vaccine" accusation likely arises from the extremely confusing story of Tungyang 東洋, a Taiwanese pharmaceutical company, which had been in talks with BioNTech and possibly, Shanghai Fosun as well (though I'm unclear on this). but pulled out for unclear reasons. Some say the amount of product offered for the price made for a poor business decision. It has been reported that at that time, the drug wasn't far enough along in clinical trials for the company to feel confident in the deal, whereas others say Tungyang dithered too long. Still others say that the government wasn't adequately supporting them (one would expect the government to commit to purchasing those doses from Tungyang, once approved). 

I don't know what happened, but it seems clear that if the Taiwanese government turned its back on these BioNTech doses to protect their own profits from local vaccine sales, then they wouldn't have tried so hard to procure millions of other foreign vaccines. Whatever is going on here, it isn't that.

In fact, it sure sounds like the sort of thing people who stand to make a lot of money on the Shanghai Fosun doses would say to divert attention from their own activities. (I can't prove that, however.)



But China can't block Taiwan's access to vaccines!

Yes, they can. 

I'll talk more below about how people came to believe that the only way Taiwan can access BioNTech vaccines must be through Shanghai Fosun, the Chinese company that claims it has rights to "Greater China". 

But first, Taiwan has every right to seek another distribution channel from the manufacturer, which can accept or reject this. Taiwan has now directly stated that China intervened in Taiwan's own negotiation with BioNTech, which again, it had every right to engage in.

This wouldn't even be close to the first time China has pressured an international organization or company to change how it deals with Taiwan, from excluding Taiwan from the WHO, trying to block international aid to Taiwan after major disasters, to pressuring airlines and IELTS and other English proficiency exams to call Taiwan "Taiwan, China".

The vaccine issue is no different.

If you think China can't do the exact same thing to a vaccine distribution contract, please think again.


Shanghai Fosun has the "right" to claim distribution for BioNTech in Taiwan, and the government is trying to circumvent them

This has a veneer of truth, but is ultimately false. 

Drugs available in Taiwan need to be approved by the Taiwan FDA, and are often batch-tested as well (this is certainly the case with coronavirus vaccines). Brokers and agents -- who may have the right to produce the same drug, or sell an already-produced drug from the original manufacturer -- also require approval. 

Fosun doesn't have this approval in Taiwan itself, so its "rights" don't exist here -- it can't just barge into the market at will. It still needs that TFDA approval.

For many drugs, multiple avenues of purchase are approved in Taiwan. If you're on any long-term medication, you might have noticed that the packaging and even 'look' of the drug changes, despite the actual drug being the same. For example, my main anxiety medication is lorazepam. It's usually branded as "Silence" -- small, white pills in bubble sheets. Then my hospital changed distributors and I still got lorazepam, but they were larger, yellow pills dosed out into sealed plastic packets (I don't remember the name, but it had changed). Now they're back to the familiar Silence. Once, I was given Ativan: tiny blue pills in gold foil sheets that are half as strong, and was told I can take two. Ativan is lorazepam in a smaller dose. Why? The hospital changed suppliers, but it's all the same drug.

It's very common, and a highly competitive business.

Approval, however, remains crucial. Even if the drug is not fake, if it's sold through an unauthorized channel, the government considers it to be "counterfeit". It doesn't matter if that distributor has an agreement with a manufacturer whose drug is approved in your country; the distributor also requires approval. Any pre-approval agreements are contingent on that process being completed.

What does this mean for Shanghai Fosun? That they may have "secured the rights for Greater China" including Taiwan from BioNTech, but there is absolutely no law or regulation stopping Taiwan from seeking out an alternative method of acquisition. BioNTech could always refuse, but they always have the right to authorize another distributor that is not Fosun.

It's not even that rare, and it sure doesn't seem to be a problem for Fosun or the CCP if the buyer is pro-China billionaire Terry Gou, who once called independence supporters "garbage".

That's why they talked to Taiwan in the first place, before backing out -- after pressuring Taiwan to remove the word "country" from the contract -- under what I can only assume was some sort of pressure or (ahem) aggressive incentivization. 

In fact, what Fosun has are the rights to sell a drug called "Fubitai", which is BioNTech's drug with a Chinese name. As far as BioNTech is concerned, it has no official Chinese name for its drug, that's a name Fosun is authorized to use. Taiwan has every right to seek out the same drug, not branded as "Fubitai". Another distributor for this drug is Pfizer, and Pfizer has no agreement with Shanghai Fosun. Although BioNTech might object -- meaning perhaps the contract would be rejected or there would be a fee -- there is no law prohibiting Pfizer and Taiwan from working together. 

Even Tungyang,  the Taiwanese company which tried to secure BioNTech rights but ultimately didn't (a long convoluted story that could be its own post), was not doing anything wrong by ultimately not working with Fosun. They might have made other mistakes, but talking to BioNTech was not one of them. Companies do it all the time. The only real issue here is that the government's messaging could have been clearer.

And this isn't even getting into the timeline of when Taiwan was or wasn't specified in the "Greater China" contract with Shanghai Fosun. I'm quite aware there's a story here and have my sources, but it's become increasingly clear that it doesn't matter. 


Taiwan "rejected" Fosun's offer of vaccines

Imagine if I applied to do a PhD at Harvard, but before I could even send in my application and proposal, the Dean of my preferred school called me up to tell me personally that she intended to reject me. 

That sounds like the sort of nightmare I'd have, but in the waking world it would be preposterous.

Well, so is this myth. 

The cold hard fact is that Fosun never applied to distribute those vaccines in Taiwan. I offered one possible reason why in my last post: basically, it would require a level of submission commensurate with approval by a national government. So by making such a submission, Fosun would in essence be admitting it is dealing with a national-level government. In other words, that Taiwan is a country. 

People have been complaining that Tungyang (mentioned above) didn't seem to think this was a problem, and that the approval should be fairly easy. However, Tungyang is a Taiwanese company that would be quite familiar with the approval process and regulations. Shanghai Fosun has never applied for such approval because Chinese drugs are banned in Taiwan. In fact, I'm not sure any Chinese drug company has gone through this process in Taiwan. 

Therefore, there's probably another reason Fosun hasn't applied: these doses are said to have been produced in Germany, so in theory, a Chinese company could apply to distribute them in Taiwan. However, Fosun has said they intend to start domestic production of "Fubitai" soon. As they would be Chinese-made, Fosun would not be able to sell them here. They'd be going through all that work for a one-time shipment of vaccines. 

So what is the incentive for Fosun to go through that process for a one-off sale?

Far more likely that it was a political ploy all along to attack the Taiwanese government in the window they have open to them -- when Taiwan is facing a crisis, and vaccine uptake has been slow.

That said, I would actually understand why the government wouldn't want to deal with Fosun. They seem dodgy at best -- complaining about not having rights they never applied for -- and I wouldn't want to deal with them either. It's likely Tungyang got spooked by them too. This might be the reason why the government now insists it will only talk to manufacturers directly: perhaps it got burned in these previous negotiations.

That doesn't mean, however, that Fosun was "pre-emptively" rejected.

I don't really know the full story behind why Tungyang's deal with BioNTech fell through, but it doesn't really matter. Perhaps the government could have supported Tungyang more. Perhaps it seemed wise in the moment to decide against the deal, as the vaccine hadn't been through all clinical trials. The government's own messaging on this could be a lot clearer.

Regardless, the company kicking up a fuss now is Fosun. And yet, they don't seem to be any closer to actually applying for distribution approval. 

You can just buy vaccines at Costco in the US, so why not do that?

This one is the funniest, but fortunately doesn't seem to be widely believed. And yet, there's always someone.

KMT Chair Johnny Chiang recently tweeted out a picture of a vaccination center available at Costco in the US, and KMT city councilor (and person who perhaps needs an intervention) Wang Hong-wei 王鴻薇 posted that if vaccines were so easy to get in the US that you could just buy them at Costco, shouldn't Chen Shih-chung just head to the US and buy out the stock?

I hope that I don't need to post a lengthy explanation of why you cannot, in fact, just go buy vaccine doses in bulk at Costco, right next to the Einstein's Bagels, tubs of oregano and massive graduation cakes.

Perhaps Wang is really that ignorant, but it's more likely that she's smart enough to know how ridiculous she sounds, but doesn't think her constituents are smart enough to see it.

I don't want to put every preposterous statement by every KMTer on the party as a whole. Wang is one city councilor. However, that's hard to do that when it's not just the grunts but the caucus whip saying Chen Shih-chung should be "executed" -- a method of governance the KMT is intimately familiar with, though you'd think they would have figured out was wrong by now. It's even harder when KMTers below him echo that sentiment.

However, with the KMT calling for cooperation with the government while continuing to undermine them at all levels, I have to wonder whether they're truly striving for cooperation or they're just a bunch of backstabbing Mean Girls.



It is possible for Shanghai Fosun to distribute their doses of German-made BioNTech in Taiwan quickly, but the government is blocking them

No.

It's not even clear these particular doses could make it to Taiwan. The approval process takes months, as you can see by the lengths of time some of these contract dramas have played out. At the latest, the doses in question expire by September. There's a very good chance they'd be expired by the time they were even shipped. Plus, it seems odd that Shanghai Fosun would just have all those doses sitting in a warehouse, knowing full well they can't sell them to Taiwan without going through the proper channels. There's a fair chance what they have is the option to buy the doses, not the drugs themselves. I can't prove that, however.

And by then, Taiwan would have other options available, including AZ, Moderna and the domestic vaccine.

Changing that timeline to get the doses here quickly would require changing the law to allow Chinese drugs into the Taiwanese market, and I know very few people who aren't deep blue unificationist extremists who think that's a good idea.

In any case, the main point here is that Fosun never applied to distribute its doses in Taiwan, but is complaining that it can't distribute its doses in Taiwan! The only way around this if Fosun continues its obstinacy is for Taiwan to just...pretend it doesn't have laws and allow Fosun to operate here the way it can in Hong Kong and Macau. 

Essentially, you can have these doses but the price is your sovereignty.

In other words, if you want those German doses of BioNTech, then pressure Fosun to submit the necessary data, samples and paperwork. 

They're the ones holding it up. But even then, it's a daydream to think these doses could possibly make it to Taiwan in time.

Chen Shih-chung is not being transparent about Taiwan's attempts to obtain vaccines

It's true that sometimes the information from the CECC on what vaccines are coming, where they're coming from and when seems unclear. By June, by July, some are coming, we're awaiting the next shipment, they're on order. It would be reassuring to hear something more concrete. The disparity between the number of shipments actually received and what Taiwan says it's ordered seem huge.

However, this doesn't appear to me to be a lack of "transparency". Again, there is a global vaccine shortage. Many countries likely have similar issues: millions of doses on order, but shipments coming frustratingly late. 

I don't have as much of a window into this world as I do into pharmaceutical approval processes (which I know a surprising amount about despite not working in the field, because I've listened to dozens of presentations on just this issue). I would imagine, however, that there are a lot of harried phone calls, negotiations and favors, wheedling and requesting, cases being made, and back-and-forth in order to ensure that at least some of what's on order is received in a timeframe that can ensure the government seems to have the issue under control. 

It's very hard to put this sort of constant negotiation into palatable words for the public. Nobody really wants to see how sausages are made. Information is great, and we need as much as possible. Said in just the wrong way, however, too much information provides fodder for the KMT to call you weak, bureaucratic, slow or ineffective. They're probably just trying to maintain public trust by not raising a fuss (and everyone's blood pressure) about the actual mechanics of vaccine procurement in a time of crisis and shortage. 

One thing I do think they could do better isn't so much transparency, but messaging. The Tsai government still has one key weakness: they don't announce their victories clearly enough. This feels very cultural to me, in a particularly Taiwanese (and perhaps Japanese) way. The KMT seems to have no issue announcing successes regarding things they haven't even done all that well! Clearer messaging on how hard they are working to get all of this to happen without showing the whole sausage might help, but it has to be done carefully.

Chen Shih-chung is not trying hard enough to obtain vaccines (and is satisfied with 'second-rate' ones)

See above. Pay attention to the actual numbers involved when the CECC talks about what it's been trying to order, and how they waited quite some time to go from "implying" that China blocked their access to BioNTech to outright stating it. 

It's quite clear that this is a monumental, difficult and frustrating task. AZ came first because that's what we could get, not because Chen thinks Taiwanese don't deserve the best vaccines. The shipments are slow, again, because of a global vaccine shortage and access inequities. 

I'm not even sure Chen sleeps at this point. That's how hard he is clearly working.

The outbreak is in part due to the Tsai government being 'complacent' about vaccination drives

This is completely backwards. 

The government procured the vaccines it could, and tried to get them out to frontline workers and other priority groups. It was the lack of local transmission at the time that stymied the drive, not complacency. (The area where they made the big mistake was the shortened flight staff quarantine and not ensuring adequate security at quarantine hotels.) 

People didn't want the shots because they didn't think they needed them. 

So, rather than be complacent about that, the government opened it up to just about everyone. It's true that many people who could have simply signed up for a self-paid shot didn't because they didn't realize that nobody was going to follow up on their "reason", but at the time, it made sense to create a small barrier to ensure there wasn't a stampede for vaccines, to ensure that doses would still be available for the priority groups should they change their mind. 

Once it became clear that the local outbreak was a real problem, the government immediately changed course, and now those vaccines have been given to priority candidates. 

That is not government complacency. It's the government trying to include normal human behavior into their vaccination strategy.

A new study on Sinopharm offers evidence that it's more effective than previously thought, therefore it definitely is (and thus we should consider allowing it into Taiwan)

I don't want to spend a lot of time on this, but as the most reprehensible unificationists in the KMT are trying to use the "let the German BNT doses in!" talk as a gateway to calling for Sinopharm (and other Chinese drugs) to be allowed into Taiwan. This would essentially mean changing the law. 

Not that unificationists and malicious CCP actors see it that way. Having helped create Taiwan's vaccine problem -- and make it seem like more of a failure than it really is in the media -- they offer a "solution": use our Shanghai Fosun/BioNTech vaccines, and here are some Sinopharm ones too! Just issue a "permit". Forget that you have your own FDA and approval process. Forget that Chinese drugs are banned by law in Taiwan. Let us treat you like Hong Kong and Macau! 

It's a poison apple: take it, and watch your citizens' willingness to get vaccinated plummet and pay for it with your sovereignty. Or refuse it, and we continue to attack you for not doing "enough" to procure vaccines.

At around the same time this attack started up, a study came out showing Sinopharm may be more effective than previously thought. However, it is unclear how much protection it provides against severe symptomatic cases or how well it works for older patients. At the same time, the Seychelles, which has the most vaccinated population in the world (it helps that it's a small population), is seeing a fresh outbreak. About 60% of vaccinated individuals in Seychelles received Sinopharm; the rest received AstraZeneca. Although most cases were among the unvaccinated or those who'd only received their first dose, it's still troubling that vaccinating most of a country's citizens with Sinopharm does not appear to be enough to reach herd immunity. 

Generously, I would call this data inconclusive. That one study is fantastic. It's one study. I'd like to see some replication, especially given the situation in the Seychelles.

Now, I actually want Sinopharm to work. In so many countries, it's the only option, or one of the only ones. China, Thailand, Seychelles, half of all available doses in Hong Kong: Sinopharm. With WHO emergency approval, the number of people who will receive Sinopharm will only rise. Those people deserve to be safely vaccinated as much as anyone else. I do hope the doses they have received are effective, as any human would.

That said, I accepted AZ but would refuse Sinopharm. I personally do not trust any drugs from China, nor the government under which they are produced. 

I also do not think the law should be changed or temporarily suspended to allow Chinese vaccines (or any drugs) into Taiwan. I honestly do believe the CCP is evil enough to tamper with the supply, because China is an existential threat to Taiwan. It is in their best interest for Taiwan to suffer. 

As such, I don't even really think the Shanghai Fosun doses should be let into Taiwan. But certainly, whatever data might say about Sinopharm, Taiwan should never, ever trust the CCP or any drugs it attempts to bring into Taiwan.

I don't know the percentage of Taiwanese who'd be willing to take the Fosun-brokered BioNTech doses made in Germany if they could. There's no data. But we do know that willingness to take Chinese vaccines is very low: less than 2%. All those Chinese business executives claiming "Taiwan compatriots" want Chinese vaccines -- and not clarifying the doses in question -- are deliberately dodging this clear fact. 

In fact, if the Taiwanese government were to allow Fosun's German doses in, they'd probably have to ensure they remain separate from any supply where patients don't get to choose which vaccine they receive, as it may impact willingness to make an appointment at all. If the allowed Chinese-made vaccines in, that would cause even more of a problem. Afraid they'd be injected with a Chinese-made vaccine against their will, registrations might well plummet. If they went ahead with the procurements anyway, they'd have to be very clear about messaging: that you'll only get these shots if you specifically sign up for them. 

It's smart for the government to refuse to play this game.

Yes, this is political. But the threat is real, and unique to Taiwan.