On March 10 every year, Tibetans around the world and their supporters come together to commemorate Tibetan Uprising Day. This year marks the 55th anniversary of the uprising.
For Tibetans, neither Dharamsala, India, or free and democratic Taiwan is their homeland. Tibet is their home. In 1959, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invaded Tibet, forcing the 14th Dalai Lama to flee, which triggered an exodus of Tibetans across the Himalayas into India, away from ruthless persecutions and killings. This was done to save Tibetan culture and Tibetan lives, in the hope that they would some day be able to return to their peaceful homeland.
There are 376 Tibetans in exile in Taiwan, but just a minority have obtained Republic of China citizenship, while most of the others are stateless. Taiwan still has not passed a refugee act and the government does not recognize the “Green Book” issued by Tibet’s government-in-exile as a passport. Unless Tibetans here obtain an overseas Chinese temporary registration certificate, they are unable to access the same basic human rights, such as employment and medical care, held by any Republic of China (ROC) national.
The government has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and included them in the domestic legal system. The government must therefore view the issue of human rights for Tibetans based on international human rights standards.
These two covenants promise to respect, protect and improve basic human rights for everyone, without limiting rights to just those who hold citizenship. In this spirit, the government cannot view Tibetans in exile in Taiwan as being stateless. The government should pay Tibetans in exile the attention they deserve and fulfill Taiwan’s legal obligation to abide by the two covenants.
If President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government is serious about putting the two covenants into practice and bringing Taiwan in line with international practice, there are two options available.
The first would treat basic human rights and nationality as separate issues and recognize the rights of every resident of Taiwan.
The second option would be to recognize the official documents issued by the Tibetan government-in-exile and view Tibetans as having a nationality.
Taiwan’s government has long been diplomatically oppressed and militarily threatened by China and it should therefore be able to understand what the Tibetans in exile are going through. The government should also announce that it will protect the rights of Tibetans in Taiwan based on basic principles of human rights.
The Ma administration may not agree with Tibet’s struggle for independence, but this has nothing to do with protecting the basic human rights of Tibetans. Furthermore, pro-Beijing people should give more consideration to the real reasons why Tibetans protest.
If the Chinese government respects Tibetans, as it claims, why do Tibetans continue to protest? Why are so many Tibetans protesting through self-immolation? Why has the Tibetan Youth Congress not abandoned its quest for Tibetan independence? Why are Tibetans in exile around the globe still looking for a way to return home?
These are issues that every Taiwanese concerned about their own future should think carefully about.
Huang Song-lih is convener of Covenants Watch. Shih Yi-hsiang is executive secretary of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights.
Translated by Drew Cameron
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Swiftly following the conclusion of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) China trip, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office unveiled 10 new policy measures for Taiwan. The measures, covering youth exchanges, agricultural and fishery imports, resumption of certain flights and cultural and media cooperation, appear to offer “incentives” for cross-strait engagement. However, viewed within the political context, their significance lies not in promoting exchanges but in redefining who is qualified to represent Taiwan in dialogue with China. First, the policy statement proposes a “normalized communication mechanism” between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This would shift cross-strait interaction from
RSS