The government and the judiciary appear to be taking espionage lightly, judging by a recent string of cases.
The New Taipei District Court on Thursday sentenced retired lieutenant colonels Lin Shih-pin (林世斌) and Pien Peng (邊鵬) to six months in prison for spying for China, adding that time behind bars could be commuted a fine of NT$180,000 each.
The same day, the Supreme Court upheld the Taiwan High Court’s ruling in April last year of a 14-month sentence for Chinese national Zhou Hongxu (周泓旭) for contravening the National Security Act (國家安全法) by recruiting people for a Chinese spy network in Taiwan, in what was the final ruling in the case.
Earlier this month, the Taipei District Court granted New Party Taipei City Councilor Ho Han-ting’s (侯漢廷) appeal for a lifting of a travel ban so that he could join Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) delegation on a trip to the US, even though Ho was indicted in June last year on espionage charges in connection with Zhou’s case, for allegedly funneling money from China to infiltrate Taiwan’s military and connect with Taiwanese youth organizations.
The Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office fought the request, but the court allowed Ho to pay a deposit of NT$100,000 to cover the nine-day trip, subject to confiscation if he does not return home by Monday next week.
Dumbfounding does not even begin to encompass the sheer absurdity of these decisions and the judges’ seeming ignorance of, or lack of awareness of, national security concerns.
As amazing as such lenient decisions are, the courts appear to be simply following precedent, considering the case of retired major general Hsu Nai-chuan (許乃權), who was involved in the largest espionage case in the nation’s history.
Hsu was convicted of leaking secrets to the Chinese Communist Party, and yet he received a prison sentence of just two years and 10 months and was still entitled to receive 70 percent of his pension after he was released from prison in September 2017.
Even though his crime damaged national security, taxpayers must pay him a monthly pension of about NT$75,000 — it would have been more, but the Legislative Yuan in 2016 amended the Act of Military Service for Officers and Noncommissioned Officers of the Armed Forces (陸海空軍軍官士官服役條例) to reduce the pensions in such cases by 30 percent in a bid to deter active duty personnel and retired officers from leaking military secrets or spying for China.
The judiciary and the legislative and executive branches appear willing to turn a blind eye to national security threats, thereby conniving with those who commit treason by spying, leaking classified information or otherwise breaching national security.
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) last week held a meeting of the National Security Council and emphasized the need for the government “to prevent China from manipulating domestic discussion, infiltrating society, and stealing classified information from the national defense and other core industries, and protect national security and social stability.”
However, Tsai will struggle to convince the public that the government is doing all it can to safeguard national security and deter threats if those convicted of espionage or damaging national security, or indicted in such cases, are shown such indulgence.
If Tsai means what she said at the meeting, the government must quickly follow through with concrete actions, such as amending the National Security Act (國家安全法), the Classified National Security Information Protection Act (國家機密保護法) and the Criminal Code to close legal loopholes that allow people convicted of spying for China to avoid treason charges.
Only through such steps can the government demonstrate its resolve; otherwise, Tsai and her officials will appear little different from the judges who are so lenient toward those who harm the nation and threaten its security.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath