Anger of Taiwanese people cannot be so easily appeased

The sanctions include freezing all applications from Filipino workers seeking employment in Taiwan, an action that many Filipino workers cannot accept. Many Filipinos ask why we cannot accept the apology from Manila Economic and Cultural Office (MECO) chairman Amadeo R Perez, who was authorised by the President of the Philippines Benigno Aquino III.

While it may seem emotional for Taiwanese fishermen to burn the Philippine flag in front of the Philippine representative office in Taipei, it is quite understandable that the nation would burst into such fury when another country takes the life of a local citizen. The anger flared up when the Philippine government initially refused to apologise for the incident, following the murder, calling it an act of “self-defence” because the vessel was about to ram its ship.

The term “self-defence” is sometimes tricky, because it can also be used as a term to justify an alleged murder, as has been the case with many controversial trials over the past years. Whether the Taiwanese vessel was attempting to ram the Philippine Coast Guard or not, the weaponless boat was clearly mismatched. In any case, killing an unarmed man, even when he projected threatening behaviour, is without doubt a significant act.

In the 21st century, with better technology and more advanced weapons, military weapons should be used with extreme care as the possibility of war is forever present. That is why, during the Diaoyutais row between Japan and Taiwan, only water canons were used. (These islands are known as the Diaoyu in China and as the Senkaku in Japan).

Taiwanese Premier Jiang Yi-huah rejected a subsequent apology statement that was issued far past the 72-hour ultimatum deadline, calling it insincere and ambiguous. What the government could not accept was that the Philippine government called the act unintended and unfortunate. Holding a picture of the bullet-riddled vessel, Jiang lambasted such a notion, noting that the gunner was clearly strafing. In disbelief he said, “How can you call this 51-bullet hole boat an unintended shooting?”

On the night when the Philippines top envoy to Taiwan, Antonio Basilio, met with the foreign minister, he presented four different versions of a response statement one after another from the Philippine government – an act that raised questions about their sincerity.

The final version of the statement did not promise, as its previous version did, the penalty of a fine, leave of service or imprisonment for the perpetrators. Taiwan demanded that the Philippine government issue a formal apology, promise to levy a punishment on the perpetrators and open bilateral fishery agreement talks.

Taiwan also asked for “national compensation” because it was a so-called act of negligence by a government body that allowed such behaviour. The Philippines’ response, however, only stated that the victims of the family will be compensated by donations from Filipinos.

What Taiwan would like to see is a face-to-face, sincere apology from the Philippine government where they promise clearly and explicitly to provide a national compensation for the victim’s family and punishment for the perpetrators. The Philippines, thus far, has been ambiguous with its responses at best. That, alone, is enough to prove their insincerity.

And it is because of this reason that Taiwan is compelled to conduct retaliatory measures to exert pressure on the Philippine government. It may not be fair to some Filipino workers, but punishment always comes at a price. The Taiwan government will at all costs do whatever it can to protect the sovereignty of the country and the safety of its people – which any nation would do.