Many Taiwanese were indignant when a group of former military officers in November last year attended an event in Beijing, where they listened to a policy address by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in which he warned against Taiwanese “separatism.”
The group was made up of seven retired generals, 12 former lieutenant generals and 18 retired major generals. The group were seen standing at attention and singing the People’s Republic of China’s national anthem along with Chinese political and military officials. The Veterans Affairs Council at the time reminded retired military personnel that they should not attend official events held by the Chinese government, while Premier Lin Chuan (林全) threatened to cancel the pensions of retired civil servants and military personnel who participate in political activities in China.
However, just how determined the Cabinet is to curb such conduct among military personnel remains to be seen.
Media reports regarding proposed amendments to the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) are telling. Last week, reports said that the Executive Yuan was considering fining members of the group between NT$10,000 and NT$50,000 each, but an Executive Yuan official said that this was only one example of the punishment the Cabinet was considering.
The Executive Yuan yesterday proposed a fine of between NT$10,000 and NT$50,000 (US$318 and US$1,591) for retired military personnel who do not apply for permission to visit China and a fine of NT$200,000 to NT$2 million for those who “engage in Chinese Communist Party political events and behave in ways that damage our national dignity,” rather than cuts to pensions or other retirement benefits, media reports said.
Although these reports were denied by Executive Yuan spokesman Hsu Kuo-yung (徐國勇), who said the amendments are among various proposals being discussed, the scale of possible punitive measures are indicative of the Cabinet’s seemingly lenient stance on the matter.
While a fine of up to NT$2 million might sound like a lot to average Taiwanese, such an amount is disproportionate to how much classified information military personnel have access to during their careers. The fines are hardly a deterrent for those who are eager to take part in political activities in China and shake hands with Chinese Communist Party officials; if anything, a fine of NT$2 million might play into the hands of Beijing, which would certainly be willing to pay a fine as a “favor” to an informant.
How is the government to reinforce military ethics and loyalty when such punitive measures make light of conduct by retired military officials in China?
A Taiwan Thinktank survey last month found that 73.8 percent of respondents think it is inappropriate for former military officials to engage in political activities in China, while 73.9 percent said they support the establishment of regulations for retired military officials visiting China.
The Cabinet is certainly unfit to trumpet the importance of national security if its proposed amendments will let retired military officials who engage in inappropriate events in China off the hook so easily. Hopefully the Cabinet does not fall short of public expectations.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS