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.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS