Following a series of disputes with Beijing, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has hit back at China, saying that “The Australian people stand up” — paraphrasing a slogan famously associated with Mao Zedong (毛澤東) — to express his nation’s stance against Beijing’s meddling in its national affairs.
While the incident highlights Australia’s increasing awareness of China’s interference and attitude toward Australia, it also points out how China has been exerting influence on governments worldwide.
As a primary target, Taiwan must be careful.
The relationship between Australia and China became tense on Dec. 5, when the Australian government announced that it would introduce a law banning foreign political donations and broadening the legal definition of espionage to prevent foreign powers from influencing domestic politics, with Turnbull citing “disturbing reports about Chinese influence.”
The New York Times and Australian media reported that China had been trying to influence Australian politicians, businesses, schools and media outlets by sending many students and businesspeople to the country to set up their own organizations and by making large political donations.
Earlier this month, it was reported that then-senator Sam Dastyari of the Labour Party had received donations from Chinese businesses and in return supported China’s South China Sea policy.
In response to the news, Turnbull said that the government could not afford to be naive about the threat of foreign interference. Despite Chinese denials and protests, he has maintained his tough attitude.
Australia is just one of many nations that are becoming increasingly aware of China’s political infiltration.
On Dec. 5, the US’ National Endowment for Democracy (NED) issued a report called Sharp Power: Rising Authoritarian Influence, which analyzes techniques used by China and Russia to increase their political influence in other nations.
The report introduces the notion of “sharp power.”
Unlike soft power — which is influence gained through promoting culture and universal values or persuading civil society — and hard power — which means using military force and economic strength — sharp power is defined as the ability to manipulate the dissemination of information to shape perceptions, while concealing its government-led nature.
Sharp power typically targets the media, think tanks and authorities in academia, culture and other areas.
One example of sharp power is the Confucius Institutes that China has founded and established at many universities around the world, NED research officer Jessica Ludwig said.
The ostensible purpose of these institutes is to teach Chinese language, calligraphy and other aspects of Chinese culture, but it often holds exhibitions claiming that Tibet and other neighboring areas are part of China and bans students from discussing Tibet or Taiwan in the classroom.
In addition to promoting non-governmental group exchanges, cultural activities and educational and academic events, China has taken advantage of the democratic environment in other nations to buy up media outlets and provide free information and content with the aim of shaping public opinion on government policy.
A documentary made by China Central Television about the “One Belt, One Road” initiative has been broadcast in many nations, including Taiwan, but few people understand that it was pure propaganda from Beijing.
A look at how China carries out its plans to manipulate perceptions shows that it is not a random approach, but clearly targets influential people, including members of the social elite, policymakers, lawmakers, political party members and former diplomats.
“In the ruthless new competition that is underway between autocratic and democratic states, the repressive regimes’ sharp power techniques should be seen as the tip of their dagger,” the NED report says.
A comparison of China’s methods against Taiwan with the sharp power techniques it uses in other nations reveals the latter as rudimentary.
Due to Taiwan’s national identity disagreements, the changes in government power following the introduction of democracy have led to increased confusion about who the nation’s enemies truly are.
Worst of all has been the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) attempts to collaborate with the Chinese Communist Party to control Taiwanese independence supporters, which has opened the door for China to infiltrate Taiwan.
The NED report says that China has been buying media outlets, bribing people and providing content that promotes its own interests to local institutions in young democracies across central Europe and Latin America, aiming to increase its political influence in those regions.
The same techniques have been used for many years to manipulate Taiwan.
Even worse, some Taiwanese cannot wait until China uses its “united front” strategy to infiltrate and buy its way into Taiwan. Instead, they are traveling to Beijing to offer their loyalty for their own selfish gain or for ideological reasons.
It is preposterous to hear Turnbull’s naive comments about how Australia, an ocean away from China, is unable to handle the onslaught of foreign intervention and threats, while Taiwan — China’s next door neighbor — seems to be doing nothing to prevent China’s infiltration, as retired generals and party officials travel to Beijing to hear lectures from Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and soldiers who serve as Chinese spies are given light sentences and continue to enjoy their government pensions.
As far as China goes, it can infiltrate Taiwan whatever way it wants and it is happy to make the most of this opportunity.
In other young democracies, China might be satisfied with taking aim at opinion leaders who influence public opinion, academia and politicians.
In Taiwan, it behaves like quicksilver, penetrating every crack and crevice: It does not stop at opinion leaders, but starts at the grassroots, taking aim at small and medium-sized businesses, low and medium-income households, central and southern Taiwan, and the eight cities and counties led by KMT mayors and county commissioners, as well as the young generation and the general public.
The means includes offering free travel and study, granting employment and entrepreneurial advantages, poaching talent and offering big salaries.
Meanwhile, there is a group of gangsters and white-collar workers in Taiwan who are willing to aid China in promoting unification.
Fortunately, recent judicial activities — such as amending the definition of “treason” in the Criminal Code and investigating and charging members of the China Unification Promotion Party — seem to show that attitudes toward this pernicious unwillingness to prevent Chinese infiltration are improving.
The Democratic Progressive Party controls the legislative and executive branches of government and cannot afford to take a naive approach to the infiltration and threats that menace Taiwan’s existence.
It is time to take action and effectively stop such activities.
Translated by Tu Yu-an
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
The Executive Yuan and the Presidential Office on Monday announced that they would not countersign or promulgate the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) passed by the Legislative Yuan — a first in the nation’s history and the ultimate measure the central government could take to counter what it called an unconstitutional legislation. Since taking office last year, the legislature — dominated by the opposition alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party — has passed or proposed a slew of legislation that has stirred controversy and debate, such as extending
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators have twice blocked President William Lai’s (賴清德) special defense budget bill in the Procedure Committee, preventing it from entering discussion or review. Meanwhile, KMT Legislator Chen Yu-jen (陳玉珍) proposed amendments that would enable lawmakers to use budgets for their assistants at their own discretion — with no requirement for receipts, staff registers, upper or lower headcount limits, or usage restrictions — prompting protest from legislative assistants. After the new legislature convened in February, the KMT joined forces with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and, leveraging their slim majority, introduced bills that undermine the Constitution, disrupt constitutional
RSS