The shocking news on Tuesday that a group of 17 Chinese tourists have gone missing serves as a blow to those who are addicted to the opening of direct links between Taiwan and China.
The case is the first of its kind since Taiwan opened its doors to Chinese tourists about two years ago. According to one of the group's members, who was arrested by Taoyuan police yesterday, he came to Taiwan simply to find a job. As nobody picked them up when they arrived at the CKS International Airport on July 13, they left by taxi. Police are still looking for the 16 other people who went missing.
Signs show that this could have been a well-planned trip, and these tourists may have some accomplices in Taiwan, with whom they may be staying. According to one of the taxi drivers who transported the tourists, he was directed to "a certain location" by a woman with a "mainland" accent.
Perhaps the man is simply an economic refugee, and before we have any evidence, we will not make assumptions and accuse the missing tourists of having any political or intelligence missions. Still, the massive number of illegal immigrants from China in Taiwan and the sophisticated network they have built are shocking enough.
According to the Tourism Bureau's official statistics, a total of 37 Chinese tourists have gone missing after entering the nation legally this year. The Immigration Office of the National Police Agency pointed out on Tuesday that between November 1988 and June 30 this year, a total of 14,803 Chinese citizens went missing after they entered Taiwan legally. Of these, 4,806 have been found but are still in Taiwan, while another 3,638 are still unaccounted for.
These figures naturally do not include illegal immigrants who enter Taiwan by sea. As these people do not pass through any government channels, their number cannot be estimated. In addition, based on Ministry of the Interior statistics quoted by Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, of the Chinese women entering Taiwan to marry, five out of six are entering into marriages of convenience.
Such figures are shocking, for they expose a loophole in our public order and national security. At a time when China still looks on Taiwan with enmity, these people -- who have entered Taiwan legally but who now cannot be traced -- are ticking bombs embedded in our society, and are a threat to national security.
The pan-blues, now out of office, have repeatedly called for the opening of the three direct links as an important part of their bid to win votes. Some Taiwanese businesses have made use of their votes to pressure the Chen administration to establish the three links, the reason being that this will reduce transport costs between Taiwan and China. It is also an expression of their hope for a greater China economic sphere. But these purely economic motives, if looked at in the light of Taiwan's social order and national security concerns, can be seen as the short-sighted policies they are.
Don't forget, the three links work both ways. The moment we open the doors to China -- even if we ignore obvious concerns about political and military infiltration and the placement of spies -- the number of people who will "jump ship" and remain in Taiwan working illegally, is sufficient to cause insoluble social problems. If we just want to make money and do not bother to defend our social order or national security, then we might as well just let Chinese workers come and run the place.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS