On Wednesday, President Chen Shui-bian (
Of the seven points, the third stands out, because it stipulates that all cross-strait exchanges should conform to existing laws.
Anyone who signs an agreement with any government abroad or "across the Strait," or sends an envoy as signatory, without authorization from the government, should be dealt with in accordance with the law.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Chiang Pin-kun (
If Chiang is not indicted, how will we stem the pan-blue camp's enthusiasm about China, push back the influx of Chinese propaganda and expose Beijing's goodwill gesture to Taiwanese farmers for what it is? Chiang must be brought to justice.
The third point is similar to Article 113 of the Criminal Code, but it backs up the definition of foreign governments by including the phrase "across the Strait."
The point is that the Beijing administration is a foreign government and it is evident that Chiang broke the law by heading a delegation to China and signing a 10-point agreement with Chen Yunlin (
Defending Chiang and his party, Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
If the People's Republic of China (PRC) is not a foreign country, is it part of "our" country?
The Ministry of Justice will have to respond to Chen's guidelines. Minister of Justice Morley Shih (
In all honesty, Chiang's actions are already in blatant violation of existing law. If Chiang is found guilty, he will be facing a sentence of between seven years and life in jail.
Whether or not KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
Since Taiwan obeys the rule of law, the case will simply have to be played by the book.
However, it is certain that Chiang will defend himself by quoting Ma's statement that "China is not a foreign country to us." Therefore, the Council of Grand Justices will have to come forward and interpret or clarify the Constitutional issue what of "one China" means.
I believe that the Republic of China and the PRC are two countries. Each side is independent of the other.
Chiang's meeting with Chinese officials and the conclusion of the 10-point agreement obviously violated the law.
If the Council of Grand Justices were to issue an interpretation of the Constitution, it will help to clearly define the difference between Taiwan and China and resolve a political dispute through legal means.
Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator and editor-in-chief of Contemporary magazine.
TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG
Burger King Taiwan on Wednesday last week posted an update on Facebook advertising a new “Wuhan pneumonia” (武漢肺炎) home delivery meal, catering to customers hankering for a Whopper, but who wished to avoid visiting one of its outlets. “Wuhan pneumonia” is the term commonly used in Taiwan to describe COVID-19. Beijing has been waging an extensive propaganda campaign against the use of the words “Wuhan” or “China” in reference to the novel coronavirus, calling it racist and discriminatory. Meanwhile, Chinese officials have claimed that the coronavirus might have originated in the US. The intention is obvious: to distract attention from the Chinese Communist
Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force Shaanxi KJ-500 airborne early-warning aircraft and Shenyang J-11 fighters on March 16 conducted a nighttime exercise in the waters southwest of Taiwan and, in doing so, came close to the nation’s air defense identification zone. Three days later, the PLA Navy’s fleet for Gulf of Aden escort mission sailed north in the Pacific off Taiwan’s east coast via the Miyako Strait on its way home. Meanwhile, the US carried out freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea and assembled the USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier strike group with the Expeditionary Strike Group to conduct
Having returned to the UK late last year and with a Taiwanese spouse remaining in Taiwan, I have been afforded the chance to compare and contrast the UK and Taiwanese governments’ responses to the COVID-19 crisis. My early conclusions are that Taiwan benefits from a rational, competent government, which quickly recognizes, adapts to and confronts large-scale disasters. It is led by a government that does more than just talk of respecting democracy and human rights, one that is scrutinized and responds to criticism, one that is concerned about public opinion, and one that is used to dealing with emergencies on
Italy, Spain, France, the UK and the US are all depending on social distancing to fight COVID-19 and have fallen into terrible situations, with mounting positive cases and many deaths. Social distancing might flatten the curve, so that the peak is not so high that hospitals are overwhelmed with patients, the problem is that the pandemic could extend further into the future, hurt the economy more and become unbearable for society. Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and Singapore have controlled the spread of COVID-19, and the main reason is that most Asians wear masks. It can be illustrated as follows: If someone contracts the