Following the suicide last week of Su Chii-cherng (蘇啟誠), director-general of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office’s Osaka branch, the term “fake news” has gained traction, and the Ministry of the Interior is reportedly considering amending the National Security Act (國家安全法) to curb the spread of fake news, which Su in a note said was the reason for his action.
The Shanghai-based online news outlet Guancha Syndicate reported that after Typhoon Jebi, the Chinese embassy in Japan sent a shuttle bus to Kansai International Airport to evacuate Chinese travelers, as well as a group of Taiwanese, but only if they identified themselves as Chinese.
The Chinese consulate in Osaka said that it evacuated 1,044 “Chinese” — including 32 Taiwanese. China’s state-run Xinhua news agency ran the report on Sept. 6, citing the Communist Youth League of China’s WeChat account.
The news was “agonizing” to him, Su wrote.
The Chinese fabrication was picked up by the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post and numerous Taiwanese news outlets, as well as by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Arthur Chen (陳宜民), who at a news conference helped spread the fake news by quoting the Chinese consulate’s figures.
The report was finally debunked on Saturday last week by the non-profit Taiwan FactCheck Center. The group contacted the airport, which said it had turned down the Chinese consulate’s request to send shuttle buses.
Although Representative to Japan Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), Taiwan-Japan Relations Association Secretary-General Chang Shu-ling (張淑玲) and an anonymous Democratic Progressive Party official sought to correct the misinformation by directing public attention to the facts — that the Chinese were evacuated by shuttles operated by the airport — they should have done so much more assertively and through official channels.
Hsieh on Sept. 6 in a Facebook post tried to match the number of Chinese who reportedly left the airport with the total number of evacuees published by the airport and asked the public to “think about” the credibility of the professed Chinese evacuation mission.
Chang provided her reasoning at the KMT news conference, but stopped short of defending Su’s office when Chen countered her with Chinese statistics.
Had the three officials known that Su would commit suicide, they would likely have taken a tougher stance when responding to allegations that Su and his staff had treated stranded Taiwanese with indifference.
While it is impossible to encapsulate here all the messages people could take away from the mishap, three things are clear:
First, fake news spread through the Internet is borderless and can have grave consequences if not curbed quickly.
Second, fake news is a national security issue. If a news story planted by a Chinese entity can lead to the death of a diplomat, imagine how serious the ramifications a fake article could have on national security if it is not adequately addressed.
Third, government agencies must take swift countermeasures to combat fake news. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs should clarify any false reports involving the nation’s diplomats, but given the potential scope of Chinese influence, all agencies concerned have a stake in combating fake news.
The Legislative Yuan, the National Communications Commission and the Ministry of the Interior in particular have the greatest responsibility.
Su’s death was a terrible loss, but it should serve as a wake-up call to the perils of China’s penetration of society.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,