The recent repression by Beijing of Hong Kongers’ campaign for authentic democracy is in stark contrast to the seemingly friendly and tolerant attitude that it shows toward Taiwan, and what is happening in Hong Kong may be a lesson for Taiwanese.
Last week, amid mounting calls for direct democratic elections for the special administrative region’s chief executive, cyberattacks from China — allegedly mobilized by the government — paralyzed the Web site of the Hong Kong-based Apple Daily, a pro-democracy newspaper, as well as an online voting post set up by pro-democracy activists.
Despite the incidents, as well as Beijing’s remarks that it has the final say in Hong Kong, as of noon on Monday, more than 710,000 people in Hong Kong had taken part in the voting, either via the Internet or at actual voting booths.
Commenting on the phenomenon, the Chinese government-run newspaper Global Times said in its editorial that the referendum result would be illegal and useless even if more than half of Hong Kong’s population vote in it, as “more than 1.3 billion people [in China] have the right to speak on Hong Kong’s political reform.”
Things may seem a little more at ease on the other side of the Taiwan Strait.
With smiles and friendliness, as well as promises that China would do anything to benefit the Taiwanese, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Zhang Zhijun (張志軍) is scheduled to arrive in Taiwan at about noon today for a four-day visit that includes meetings with local officials, business leaders and students to “accurately learn about views of the Taiwanese society on cross-strait relations.”
These were all be familiar sights to Hong Kongers, recalling the friendliness that Chinese officials once showed them and the promises that the Chinese government made to them prior to the handover in 1997.
Facing the anxious Hong Kong public worrying about their future, Beijing did not hesitate to promise that after the handover, the socialist system would not be imposed on Hong Kong and instead, “the previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years.”
Under the Hong Kong Basic Law, Beijing also promised Hong Kongers that Chinese laws on the mainland would not apply to them, that they would enjoy the same freedoms as before and that they would “have the right to vote and the right to stand for election.”
The broken promises that Beijing once made to Hong Kong appear to be the same promises that Beijing is making to Taiwan at the moment: If Taiwan agrees to become a special administrative region under China, it would be allowed to keep its executive, legislative and judicial, as well as its social and economic, systems. Beijing even went as far as promising that Taiwan could retain its military forces.
In fact, if we look further back into history, we may find that Tibet was another victim of China’s political promises, since the Chinese government has disregarded just about everything that it promised the Tibetan government in the Seventeen-Point Agreement: that it would maintain the political system in Tibet, including the functions and powers of the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama, and that it would preserve the Tibetan language, culture and religious traditions.
If China’s promises to Hong Kong are already deteriorating only 17 years after the handover — and Tibet has seen much worse 55 years after the Chinese takeover — how can Taiwanese believe that Beijing will keep its word to Taiwan?
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
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
RSS