It would be tempting to blow the matter out of proportion, or to turn what remains an isolated incident into signs of a conspiracy. However, this does not mean that we should look the other way in cases like that of Ni Zichuan (倪子川), a Chinese official at the Fengze District office in Quanzhou, Fujian Province, who was caught stealing skincare products in Hsinchu on Friday.
Ni is believed to have twice stolen from the same store, pinching products with a total value of NT$198. Although this is a minor offence by any yardstick, his behavior fits a pattern in which a growing number of visiting Chinese have acted in a manner unbefitting of civilized people. There have been occasions when Chinese tourists simply refused to pay for meals at restaurants, and last year, Ma Zhongfei (馬中飛), a Chinese businessman, was caught taking pictures in an off-limits area at an army recruitment center in Taipei.
These are only the cases when the wrongdoers were caught.
What is troubling about the latest incident is that it involves a Chinese official. If visiting government employees cannot be bothered to set an example, how can we expect ordinary tourists to behave? It would be interesting to hear what Ni has to say about the reasons why he felt compelled to steal. Did he do it just because he could, or was this, like the Ma case, an attempt to determine how the Taiwanese authorities would react (and in the process show that Chinese usually get away with it)?
This type of conduct stems from the sense of entitlement that some Chinese have toward Taiwan. When a government official has no compunction in stealing from an ordinary merchant and faces little consequence in the host country or upon his return to China, it sends a signal that it is permissible to steal from Taiwanese. While it is true that the majority of visiting Chinese do not see things that way, all it takes is a minority — among those in power, especially — to turn this sense of entitlement into theft on a grand scale.
For the sake of good cross-strait relations, the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has bent over backwards to avoid criticizing China. This excessive patience, however, has at times bordered on obsequiousness, which in some hardline Chinese circles could be construed as subservience and capitulation. Add to this Han nationalism and the colonial tendencies of the Chinese government and it would be perfectly acceptable to plunder Taiwan the same way the Tibetan plateau has been raped since the Chinese invaded in 1959.
As Taiwan tests the waters with its new, closer relationship with China, balance is necessary and this is what has been missing under Ma’s guidance. It is generally accepted that in the name of good neighborly relations, Taiwanese should not be too sensitive and should try not to overreact to every misstep Chinese visitors make. This does not mean, however, that they should roll over when someone steps on their back.
When Beijing’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Vice Chairman Zhang Mingqing (張銘清), visiting Tainan in October 2008, lost his balance and fell, elderly demonstrators who allegedly “swarmed” him faced criminal charges. This type of behavior was unbecoming of Taiwanese, we were told, and would not be tolerated. However, in no way should this make stealing military secrets from Taiwan, or snatching products from hard-working Taiwanese merchants, any more acceptable.
If Taiwanese are to be prosecuted for minor “crimes,” so should Chinese tourists, as should everybody else, regardless of color, language, rank or religion. No one should be given preferential or extraterritorial treatment. Doing so will only invite in the wolves.
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has