In the wake of Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Joseph Wu's (
Beijing's intention is to create special courts in which anyone can be prosecuted for "separatist activity," to be interpreted as the court sees fit. We have always known that the Chinese judiciary is little more than a series of kangaroo courts in which people are punished for having run foul of authority. There is no question of evidence and no question of innocence. We are also aware of the undistinguished but lamentably large role the courts have played in the suppression of political dissent and "thought crime" of any kind.
The function of these special courts will be to try any officials from either side of the Strait who are deemed to have "not acted appropriately in opposing Taiwanese independence." As to what Taiwanese independence is, China appears to not want to stipulate this in the law but leave it to the court and its political masters to decide on an ad hoc basis. It is not clear who might be covered by the law other than officials but the guiding principles for the law's drafting obtained by Wu suggest that it will cover as wide a base as possible. "Anything other than unification is going to be defined as independence and therefore anybody who speaks out in support of Taiwan's government might be charged with this kind of crime," Wu said.
The implications need to be seriously considered in Taiwan and elsewhere.
Basically, no member of the government will be able to go to China for fear of being arrested under the law. The same goes for any Democratic Progressive Party legislator or local government official, and could also be applied to almost anybody who is appointed to speak on the government's behalf.
Given that the maintenance of Taiwan's independence is the wish of the majority of Taiwanese and is supported by their government, nobody who speaks for that government or represents the real views of Taiwanese people will be able to go to China without risking arrest.
Foreign academics might be at risk, or members of think tanks which support self-determination for Taiwan, of which the US has a considerable number.
Finally, we might consider the large number of Taiwanese now living in China. As soon as the law passes, they will be targets for shakedown artists with official connections -- and given the wealth of the China-based Taiwanese community, there will be many. You can easily imagine the kind of scenario -- "give us a stake in your enterprise or we will denounce you and you'll end up in a labor camp in Qinghai."
If what we have been led to believe is true, then after the law passes, almost no Taiwanese will be safe in China, nor will any foreigner who has ever associated with a pro-independence organization -- such as this newspaper for example.
If just stepping on Chinese soil means running the risk of a stint of "reform through labor" in the Chinese gulag, then forget about cross-strait negotiations: The cross-strait Cold War is about to enter a real ice age.
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