According to the Hong Kong-based Wen Wei Po daily, which cited a Chinese legal expert, China's National People's Congress (NPC) will convene on Saturday to discuss the proposed "anti-secession" law. According to the expert, the legislation would authorize China's State Council and the Central Military Commission (CMC) to "strike Taiwan" in an emergency situation without prior approval from China's leadership, in order to deter unspecified independence activities.
The report was released as Taiwan was commemorating the 228 Incident, in which the regime of former dictator Chiang Kai-shek massacred thousands of Taiwanese people in 1947 after the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) took control of Taiwan from the Japanese. Therefore, this message resonated strongly as foreign interference in Taiwan's internal affairs. For many Taiwanese, the message also sounds obviously harsh.
The Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is above any other organization, has a strong hold on power and executes its policies through the CMC. In other words, the Politiburo's resolutions are usually executed by its party, political and military organizations, endorsed by the NPC and united front organizations such as the People's Political Consultative Conference, and propagated by state-controlled news agencies such as Xinhua. In view of this, important issues about whether to take military action against a nation are the responsibility of the Politburo and its subordinate CMC. How could the NPC, which is only the rubber stamp of the party and the government, enact a law and ask its superior decision-making body to implement the resolution it has proposed?
We cannot help but ask, since when has China become a country that espouses the rule of law and respects public opinion? Furthermore, since the members of the NPC have never been directly elected by the Chinese people, how can they truly represent the public in enacting laws?
Because neither the Politburo or the CMC will take orders from the NPC, we see that this startling statement was intentionally made by the NPC to provoke public opinion in Taiwan. The planning of the law is used to stir up cross-strait conflict, lest political heavyweights in China become too lonely and bored, deprived of attention from domestic and international media.
However, from Taiwan's standpoint, Taiwan has never been a part of China, and there has never been any territorial agreement reached between the two nations. Questions on whether Taiwan should declare its independence, change its national title or other issues should be Taiwan's business, and Beijing has no business saying anything about them. The NPC's taking such a highly provocative course will only lead to misuse of the anti-secession law by CCP members and China's hawkish military officials. These people could use the law to threaten Taiwan, and create all sorts of exaggerated pretexts to threaten Taiwan's economic stability.
From Taiwan's perspective, the NPC's irresponsibility lies in its intention to unilaterally change the status quo of cross-strait peace. And it is intolerable that such behavior is overlooked by the international community. In fact, enforcing the anti-secession law will not force China's military officials to abide by the rules, nor will it facilitate smooth interaction between people on both sides of the Strait, or promote mutual understanding.
On the contrary, the passing of such a law will only worsen the cross-strait situation and severely impact on the willingness of Taiwanese businessmen to invest in China. The international community should help Taiwan to put pressure on the Chinese government over the proposal, which does no good for anyone. By doing so, the international community can help stop China from causing disputes that will spoil cross-strait stability.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry