The Kaohsiung City Government’s decision to bring forward the screening of a documentary on exiled Uighur Muslim activist Rebiya Kadeer — amid complaints by the tourism sector that Chinese tour groups were canceling hotel reservations — was not well-received in some quarters.
Despite Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu’s (陳菊) claim that the decision was made to prevent controversy over the screening of The 10 Conditions of Love from escalating, the move nonetheless suggests that concessions had to be made because of pressure from China.
A film festival, which serves as a platform for artists to showcase creativity and freedom of expression, should be independent and free from political interference.
Taking into account Chen’s record as an activist who served time for her involvement in the democracy movement, it is unsurprising that her government’s decision resulted in a mixture of anger and disappointment among some supporters.
It is too early to tell whether the decision will have a negative impact on her political standing. What is clear, however, is that Taiwanese of all stripes must hold fast to their democratic entitlements. Cross-strait “harmony,” whatever the benefits, should not come at this price.
The nation’s image as a defender of freedom of speech may have been affected by the decision, but if so, it is not too late to rectify that. One way to do so would be for President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government to grant Kadeer a visa.
Two civic groups — Guts United Taiwan and the Taiwan Youth Anti-Communist Corps — have issued invitations to Kadeer to visit Taiwan, which she reportedly has accepted.
Beijing’s reaction to any visit would likely be similar to its attempt to manipulate the Australian government after Kadeer was invited to attend the Melbourne Film Festival early last month.
Censorship and restrictions on movement are not a big deal in China — at least not for those who impose them. In Taiwan, however, they represent the fine line between creeping state control and a liberal society. Having tasted both in its troubled history, Taiwan should know the value of being steadfast on openness and avoiding illiberal conduct.
The embattled Ma administration now has a chance to prove that its talk about defending democracy is more than words.
Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) said on Tuesday that a decision would be announced by tomorrow on whether Kadeer would be issued a visa.
Despite Beijing’s claims, Kadeer is not a terrorist, nor would her presence in Taiwan threaten national security. As such, there is no legitimate reason why the Uighur leader should not be permitted to visit Taiwan — unless Taipei is prepared to bow to external forces that would dictate what is permissible and what isn’t inside our borders.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS