President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration’s alleged refusal to issue visas to three prominent human rights activists invited to attend the first Asia-Pacific Religious Freedom Forum constitutes a step backwards for a nation that has taken pride in its endeavors to safeguard human rights.
The forum, which opened in Taoyuan yesterday and is set to run through Sunday, offers a platform where leaders of various religions and government representatives can put aside their differences and engage in open dialogue about religious pluralism and human rights.
Such dialogue is particularly imperative at the moment, given that people in many parts of the world are still subjected to discrimination, oppression and abuse because of their religious beliefs, as well as the serious and imminent threats posed by the Islamic State group, which uses religion to justify its extremist actions.
Taiwan is home to 28 religions, the newest one being Weixinism, which expounds on Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism, and promotes the studies of the Chinese classic I Ching (易經) and feng shui.
The nation’s religious diversity and tolerance are no doubt what prompted the host organizations of the forum — including the US’ Christian human rights organization China Aid, Freedom House and rights group the Lantos Foundation — to bring the event to Taoyuan.
While it might not come as a surprise, it is certainly unfortunate to learn that the Ma administration has decided not to issue visas to World Uyghur Congress president Rebiya Kadeer, Tibetan government-in-exile Prime Minister Lobsang Sangay and Chinese activist Chen Guangcheng (陳光誠).
It goes without saying that the Ma administration does not want to upset “Big Brother” China, even though doing so contradicts the very values that Taiwan stands for.
Former vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) on Tuesday told a news conference that the grounds for the administration’s refusal to issue Lobsang Sangay a visa was that his visit would be “inconvenient.”
Religious freedom is one of the most fundamental human rights. If the Ma administration is willing to disregard even such a fundamental right for the sake of appeasing China, then how quickly the government would sacrifice other human rights for its own agenda — be it freedom of the press, freedom of expression or civil liberties.
Taiwanese often laud the nation’s freedom and democracy, because, unlike their Chinese counterparts, these values have allowed them to live a life free of censorship and elect presidents of their own liking.
However, under the Ma’s administration, there have been increasing infringements on these values, primarily because of Taipei’s alarming economic dependence on Beijing, which has forced many Taiwanese businesspeople to be at China’s beck and call.
The situation is especially visible in journalism, where some media outlets implement self-censorship in a desperate bid to attract advertising.
Fortunately, hopes for change have been revived as Ma’s second presidential term is coming to an end.
President-elect Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) should learn from Ma’s mistakes and realize that there are things far more precious than money, such as freedom and human rights.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
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
RSS