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.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS