Reports on Saturday that two Taiwanese citizens were detained by Chinese police were a stark reminder of the unbridgeable divide between democracy and authoritarianism.
Shao Yuhua (邵玉華), a Falun Gong practitioner who immigrated from China 11 years ago, was taken away, along with her Taiwan-born daughter, while visiting her family in Henan Province, the Taiwan Falun Dafa Association said.
Her sister, a follower of the same spiritual movement, was also detained. Given their faith, it is almost certain that the three were targeted not because of any crime they had committed, but because their religion has been labeled an “evil cult” by Beijing, which flouts its constitutional obligation to honor freedom of religion.
Their detention highlights a problem other governments have encountered: Beijing does not recognize dual or renounced citizenship for Chinese nationals. Even governments like Canada, which China recognizes, have trouble convincing Beijing to respect their right to protect their citizens.
It should therefore come as no surprise that Chinese authorities have no qualms about detaining Taiwanese citizens of Chinese origin.
Nevertheless, action by the Taiwanese government in taking up Shao and her child’s case could be crucial to the fate of the two.
In 2006, Huseyincan Celil — a Uighur activist who fled China, received UN refugee status and was later granted citizenship by the Canadian government — was arrested by Chinese authorities. Celil had been visiting family in Uzbekistan when he was detained and handed over to Xinjiang police at their request.
In the case of Celil, Canada’s swift and persistent diplomatic efforts may have prevented him from being executed. Ottawa sent diplomats to China to lobby for his release and secured a promise from Beijing that he would not be executed. Later, some reports said that Celil was sentenced to death, but that at the last minute the penalty was commuted to life imprisonment.
Celil remains in prison and it seems unlikely that China will yield to Ottawa’s demands for his release. Nevertheless, the decision not to execute him in a country that is almost unsparing with the death penalty was significant.
In the case of Shao and her daughter, Taiwan’s actions could help determine whether the pair will ever be freed.
The arrests illustrate the severity of China’s crackdown on Falun Gong, in which even children are not spared. It is unclear how many people have been sentenced to prison or thrown into the extrajudicial laogai system, in which prisoners have no recourse to courts, their families may not be informed of their whereabouts or sentence, and sentences are subject to arbitrary extension.
If Taipei keeps quiet on Shao’s detention, it will be failing its obligation to protect its citizens. It must push decisively and sincerely for the release of Shao and her daughter.
Unfortunately, given its silence on the oppression of Tibetans and Uighurs, it is unlikely that the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) will risk angering Chinese authorities by touching on one of the most taboo subjects in China — Falun Gong.
This, however, would only amplify doubts about the priorities of Ma’s cross-strait policies. In all dealings with China, the welfare of Taiwanese citizens must take priority.
NOTE: In the editorial above, we reported that Falun Gong practitioner Shao Yuhua's daughter and her sister, also a Falun Gong follower, had been detained by Chinese police. Shao's daughter was not detained. Her sister does not practice Falun Gong and was detained briefly and released. Only Shao remains in detention. The Taipei Times regrets the error.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the