When it comes to cross-strait affairs and policies, similarities are hard to find between the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), except for one thing: human rights.
Administrations under the two parties both emphasized human rights as one of their core values and said Taiwan’s advocacy for human rights and democracy could serve as an example and model for the Chinese Communist Party regime.
Therefore, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should immediately call for the release of the “China 18,” as well as tens of thousands of political dissidents, Falun Gong practitioners, Tibetans and Uighurs imprisoned in China.
The “China 18” campaign was launched in June by several US-based human rights groups urging Beijing to release 16 — and later 18 — prisoners of conscience.
Public hearings have been held at the Legislative Yuan, as well as the US Congress, with families of those prisoners, many of them sentenced to life terms, appealing for public attention and assistance. A US congressional subcommittee urged Ma to help free the dissidents, in particular Wang Bingzhang (王炳章), who was accused of spying for Taiwan.
Wang, 66, was sentenced following a secret trial in 2003 by the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court in Guangdong Province for various offenses, including allegedly passing military secrets to Taiwan.
If Wang, a physician, did spy for Taiwan, the government would be responsible for rescuing him from his Chinese prison via all available channels, including direct negotiations. If Wang never spied for Taiwan, Ma is obligated to offer a clear explanation and call for Beijing to immediately release him.
Ma has always cited the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as one of his biggest achievements. He has also boasted about the state of cross-strait relations under his administration, saying that they have been the best in six decades because of his ability to lower bilateral tensions.
Unfortunately, the human rights situation in Taiwan has been going backward since Ma took office, as shown by the way his administration has treated protesters. Ma has also basically stayed silent about China’s infringement of human rights.
Ma has turned a blind eye to China’s crackdown on social unrest, as well as the rights movements in Tibet and Xinjiang. He even turned his back on his own citizens, ignoring thousands of cases involving kidnappings, murders and investment disputes of China-based Taiwanese businesspeople.
What is worse is that Ma has even praised Beijing, saying it has improved its human rights record.
If Ma, who has always boasted of abiding by the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution, truly believes that the “mainland” area and Taiwan are both ROC territory, he has betrayed his citizens on both sides of the Taiwan Strait with his inaction on human rights.
The truth is that Ma has been a moral dwarf when it comes to China’s human rights violations and has, at best, offered lip service to human rights in general.
After a previous resolution called for the release of 4,033 political prisoners in China earlier this year, the legislature once again endorsed the appeal of the families of Chinese political prisoners this past week.
However, the key individual for a Taiwanese response is still Ma. The global appeal campaign will be another test of his commitment to uphold human rights as, in his own words, one of the most important core values for himself and for all Taiwanese.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS