I ran into World Uyghur Congress president Rebiya Kadeer by the elevator on my way to attend a hearing on July 19 of the US Congressional Executive Commission on China on conditions in Xinjiang a year after the riots in July last year. We exchanged a few words, and I could sense her warmth and kindness.
She was accompanied by the vice president of the World Uyghur Congress, Omer Kanat, a kind and friendly gentleman who has spent his life working for freedom and human rights for people in East Turkestan or the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region.
These two people live and work in Washington and are considered by the US government and Congress to be respected and reliable sources of information on what is happening in their homeland.
Last year, however, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration blocked Kadeer from visiting Taiwan to promote her movie The Ten Conditions of Love and only last week stalled Kanat’s visa application for so long that he was also unable to visit Taiwan.
Whose side is the Ma administration on? Does it want to promote human rights and democracy around the world — and support freedom-loving people like Kadeer and Kanat — or does it side with the repressive government in Beijing, which is increasingly seen in the international community as a perpetrator of injustice, especially in Tibet and Xinjiang?
While I was listening to the panelists’ comments about Xinjiang, I could not help but compare events in Xinjiang and Taiwan. Conditions in Xinjiang have been worsening, as the Chinese government classifies Uighurs as terrorists, stripping them of their freedom and basic rights. Do the events in Xinjiang perhaps give us some indication as to Taiwan’s future if it continues on its present course?
The Ma administration seems intent on drawing Taiwan closer to China, and in doing so has increasingly behaved in an undemocratic way in Taiwan. Ma’s agenda seems to be more concerned with pleasing the Chinese government than adhering to the basic principles of human rights and democracy.
During the question-and-answer session at the congressional hearing, Shirley Kan of the US Congressional Research Service expressed concern about these trends in Taiwan. In particular, she criticized the decision by the Ma government to block Kadeer from coming to Taiwan, saying the Taiwanese government was “at odds” with US and Japanese policies on these issues.
If the Ma government wants to be considered part of the democratic world, it needs to show more clearly and openly that it upholds human rights and democracy. Statements about “shared values” with the US are not enough.
Indeed, the Ma administration has all too often given the impression that it has “shared values” with the People’s Republic of China. Its emphasis on being “Chinese” creates the misconception that there is a common heritage — which is only true for those who came over from China with Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) after the civil war.
The reality is that Taiwanese have their own identity, a rich and multicultural heritage based on Aboriginal origins, Hoklo and Hakka influences, and half a century under Japanese rule. Based on this heritage, we need to distinguish ourselves as a freedom-loving nation that is accepted by the international community, instead of cozying up to an undemocratic China.
The people of East Turkestan regrettably do not have that choice anymore; the people of Taiwan do and must exercise the right to self-determination denied their Uighur cousins..
Susan Wang is an undergraduate student in international development Studies at McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
RSS