On Friday last week, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office announced that Taiwanese human rights advocate Lee Ming-che (李明哲) was under arrest in Hunan Province on suspicion of “subverting the state power.”
“He colluded with mainlanders, stipulated action guidelines, established illegal organizations, and plotted and carried out activities to subvert state power,” it said.
The statement added that Lee — who disappeared after he entered Guangdong Province from Macau on March 19 — “was put under coercive measures by security authorities in line with the law” and that “after interrogation, Lee and his group confessed to engaging in activities endangering national security.”
To people in Taiwan, and to observers in the rest of the world, this move represents yet another example of a repressive and undemocratic Chinese political system at work.
First, it is rather outrageous that Chinese authorities held Lee incommunicado for 68 days before formally “arresting” him. This is a violation of China’s own laws, and also the 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), which requires prompt notification by either side and also stipulates family visits.
On April 10, Beijing prevented Lee’s wife, Lee Ching-yu (李凈瑜), from boarding a flight to Beijing by canceling her “Taiwan compatriot travel document,” and to date has failed to give her information on Lee Ming-che’s well-being and whereabouts, and has refused her requests to visit her husband.
Second, the charges against Lee Ming-che are simply not credible: He might have discussed Taiwan’s transition to democracy with Chinese friends online, but if that constitutes “subverting state power,” then by its very existence as a democracy, Taiwan is “endangering [China’s] national security.”
The most worrisome part of the statement is its reference to “coercive measures” and that Lee Ming-che “confessed to engaging in activities endangering national security.”
Beijing is openly acknowledging that it has used coercive measures against Lee Ming-che.
This is yet another sign of reprehensible behavior by Chinese authorities.
Third, Beijing is obviously using this case to put pressure on the Democratic Progressive Party government of President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to agree to the so-called “1992 consensus” and accept Beijing’s “one China” principle, which is seen by most Taiwanese as a slippery slope toward unification.
However, China’s handling of the case is backfiring: It is showing Taiwanese — who are immensely proud of their democracy — that there is a huge gap between civil liberties in Taiwan and China.
It is showing Taiwanese that China is increasingly violating the universal values of democracy, freedom, human rights and the rule of law.
Particularly among young people in Taiwan, the realization is growing that China’s political system is hostile to the freedoms they have grown accustomed to since Taiwan’s own transition to democracy in the late 1980s.
Until recently, the younger generation was open to interactions and exchanges with China: college graduates did not object to moving to China for a few years to gain experience and earn a living.
This is changing: Lee Ming-che’s case is showing Taiwanese — young and old — that Beijing cannot be trusted and that it plans to use ruthless power to force its will on people who express their opinions and exercise their freedom of speech.
Gerrit van der Wees is a former Dutch diplomat and former editor of Taiwan Communique, who now teaches Taiwanese history at George Mason University in Virginia.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS