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.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Last week, Nvidia chief executive officer Jensen Huang (黃仁勳) unveiled the location of Nvidia’s new Taipei headquarters and announced plans to build the world’s first large-scale artificial intelligence (AI) supercomputer in Taiwan. In Taipei, Huang’s announcement was welcomed as a milestone for Taiwan’s tech industry. However, beneath the excitement lies a significant question: Can Taiwan’s electricity infrastructure, especially its renewable energy supply, keep up with growing demand from AI chipmaking? Despite its leadership in digital hardware, Taiwan lags behind in renewable energy adoption. Moreover, the electricity grid is already experiencing supply shortages. As Taiwan’s role in AI manufacturing expands, it is critical that
RSS