Calls for more transparency about the underground oil and gas pipelines in Greater Kaohsiung have intensified. Government officials said that the Bureau of Energy has the information, but that it is only available to government agencies. Newly appointed Minister of Economic Affairs Woody Duh (杜紫軍) added that information about “the pipelines involves national and public security.”
However, when asked about allegations that Chinese smartphone vendor Xiaomi has been stealing users’ private data to give to the Chinese government, officials merely say it is “beyond [the government’s] control.” Also, reports on the recent firepower drills on Kinmen said they were reduced in scale. The government is becoming increasingly soft when it comes to Beijing, and increasingly recalcitrant when it comes to its own people.
One example of this was seen in the conflict over the review of the cross-strait service trade agreement in March. One reason people vehemently opposed the pact was the provision that Chinese investors could enter Taiwan’s telecommunications service sector, providing store and forward network and store and retrieve network services, as well as data exchange and frame relay services. This prompted more than 200 industry insiders and experts to sign a joint petition warning the government of the need for caution to protect national security and data security for individual users.
At the time, the National Communications Commission (NCC) said that deregulation of this secondary telecommunications sector would not be a threat to national security, as part of the legal requirements call for interested parties to provide data and telecommunications security protection, monitoring self-assessment reports and attendant documents such as information management security qualifications. Yet given what people know about the competence and level of expertise of the NCC management, whose document reviews are notoriously cursory at best, they should perhaps be worried.
Countries such as the US, Canada, Australia and Indonesia have already prohibited cooperation with Chinese telecommunications equipment producers such as Huawei Technologies Co or ZTE Corp, and yet the government is still intent on opening up the nation’s secondary telecommunications service sector to Chinese investment. Is it even remotely conceivable that the Taiwanese government is better equipped when it comes to data security protection than the governments of those other countries? Nobody but a government official would have the audacity to claim with such assurance that the concerns raised involved “no threat” to national security.
It is a shame that the government is so intent on putting obstacles in people’s way, citing national and public security issues, when all they want is information. Other more advanced countries such as the US and France make comprehensive pipeline maps accessible to the public. The US Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, for example, has even established a national pipeline mapping system. These countries do not operate lower standards of national and public security than in Taiwan, and yet they still manage to guarantee people’s right to know.
When Beijing wants certain sectors opened up, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is generous, but gets all tight-fisted when people ask for information pertinent to their individual rights. The Ma administration has one way to deal with Beijing and another to deal with Taiwanese: It is just one more example of the government’s skewed logic and double standards.
Lin Hsin-jung is a Democratic Progressive Party specialist working in the Internet development department.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with