China’s open disregard for a cross-strait judicial assistance agreement during a spate of suspected cross-border telecoms fraud cases involving Chinese and Taiwanese suspects has no doubt led to a change in the cross-strait “status quo.”
The 2009 Cross-Strait Joint Crime-Fighting and Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement (海峽兩岸共同打擊犯罪及司法互助協議) has resulted in both sides since 2011 operating under a tacit agreement that Taiwanese and Chinese fraud suspects caught in a third country should be repatriated to their home nations — along with the relevant evidence and judicial records. However, China, in the past month alone, has had several Taiwanese deported to China and has failed to hand over evidence against the suspects.
In the Kenya case, on April 8 and April 12, a total of 45 Taiwanese telecoms fraud suspects, 23 of whom had been acquitted by a Kenyan court, were deported to China — despite Taiwan’s insistence that it has jurisdiction over its citizens. On April 15, Malaysia deported 20 fraud suspects to Taiwan, but failed to provide the Taiwanese authorities with relevant evidence or records of their alleged criminal activities.
In another case involving Malaysia, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration on Saturday first lodged a strong protest over Kuala Lumpur’s deportation of 32 Taiwanese fraud suspects to China instead of Taiwan. However, hours later it softened its tone, saying that “it views with positivity” China’s sending of a letter inviting a Taiwanese delegation to China to jointly handle the Malaysian and Kenyan cases.
In all these cases, Beijing has brazenly disregarded the “status quo” and failed to honor a pact signed by both sides on cross-strait judicial assistance, and the obsequious attitude of Ma’s administration has failed to uphold Taiwan’s judicial powers — or the nation’s dignity.
Rather than condemning China over what a New Power Party legislator described as an “extrajudicial abduction,” and asserting Taiwan’s jurisdiction over its own people, the Ma administration has reasserted its position as Beijing’s lackey, saying that China’s actions ensure the best outcome in terms of cracking down on crime.
Truly pathetic.
While pretending to investigate cross-border fraud, Beijing’s real goal is to try and foster among the international community the idea that Taiwan belongs to China.
So far, the tactic has worked brilliantly, with even Taiwan’s government quickly censoring its condemnation.
As a result of the Ma administration’s spinelessness when it comes to dealing with China, Taiwan’s judicial power has been greatly undermined and its sovereignty slighted — needless to say the integrity of the Cross-Strait Joint Crime-Fighting and Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement has been left in tatters.
More importantly, each time a nation responds to Taiwan citing the “one China” principle, the damage increases — the repeated cases of Taiwanese being “extradited” to China instead of Taiwan help cement the illusion Beijing desires — that the cross-strait dialogue takes place within “one China.”
From the Kenya case through to Malaysia’s deportation of Taiwanese to China, Ma, although slated to step down in less than three weeks, has shamelessly dragged led Taiwan straight into the jaws of Beijing’s “one China” trap.
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
The war between Israel and Iran offers far-reaching strategic lessons, not only for the Middle East, but also for East Asia, particularly Taiwan. As tensions rise across both regions, the behavior of global powers, especially the US under the US President Donald Trump, signals how alliances, deterrence and rapid military mobilization could shape the outcomes of future conflicts. For Taiwan, facing increasing pressure and aggression from China, these lessons are both urgent and actionable. One of the most notable features of the Israel-Iran war was the prompt and decisive intervention of the US. Although the Trump administration is often portrayed as
RSS