Last Tuesday, Chinese police shot dead at least three villagers during protests in Dongzhou Village, Guangdong Province, over forced appropriation of land for the construction of a wind farm. The protest deteriorated into a battle between the police and the villagers when relatives were not granted access to the bodies of those who had been killed.
Officials blocked the release of the story for three days, but it became public last Friday when it was revealed that the death toll may have been 30 or more -- which would make it one of the bloodiest crackdowns on protesters since the 1989 student-led protest in Beijing's Tiananmen Square.
According to Reuters, quoting Chinese Security Minister Zhou Yongkang (
The official figures for the number of confrontations between the public and the police probably underestimate the scale of such incidents, and the Chinese government has been glossing over the extent of the unrest. The international community is not convinced by Beijing's claims about the benefits of "social democracy with Chinese characteristics," and is even getting a little sick of them. It is beginning to realize that Beijing's sense of superiority is based on the government's willingness to shoot and kill civilians in order to retain its grip on power. After unleashing the military on the Tiananmen protesters, the government took no political or moral responsibility for its actions. It cannot be criticized by the Chinese media, and cannot be voted out of office.
On Oct. 19, the Information Office of China's State Council issued a document of more than 30,000 characters titled Building Political Democracy in China. The document put special emphasis on the fact that "China's democracy is a people's democracy under the leadership of the CCP [Chinese Communist Party]." This should be revised to state that China's democracy is one in which the people can be massacred by the CCP.
This document has been regarded by many in the international community as a white paper on China's political development. The document notes that democracy springs from the people and is not imposed from outside. The government's own words go to show that Beijing has no intention of introducing democracy in China.
The question must be asked: If China has not achieved democracy in the course of its 5,000-year history, are its people condemned to be denied it forever? Would not any benevolent government seek to learn from other nations and bring about a more civilized system of rule? Is not a system of counting heads preferable to one of breaking them?
The people of Taiwan are concerned about the development of democracy in China. They sincerely hope that China will attain democracy as soon as possible, and that it will not lightly resort to armed conflict to resolve the cross-strait impasse.
But from what we have seen of this massacre of villagers, the Chinese government has yet to learn the lesson of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. If it treats its own people with such violence, it would surely act with even greater harshness against the people of Taiwan. Surely those who advocate unification with China cannot be blind to this?
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS