Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has just concluded a five-day visit to Italy, Monaco and France. At a time of all-out confrontation in the US-China trade dispute, Beijing is trying to get European nations on its side by tackling them one by one.
However, on Thursday last week, just as Xi arrived in Italy, the Council of the European Union discussed a program of 10 actions that make up a hardline strategy toward China.
A few days earlier, on March 12, the European Commission released a paper that adjusts the EU’s strategy toward China by calling it an “economic competitor” and a “systemic rival promoting alternative models of governance.”
On March 14, the European Parliament approved by an overwhelming majority a resolution that urges the EU and its 28 member states to adopt a sanctions regime similar to that embodied in the US’ Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, which calls for sanctions against governments and politicians who violate human rights.
The act is named after Russian tax accountant Sergei Magnitsky, who died in pretrial detention in 2009.
The act and similar laws adopted by other nations impose sanctions on officials of specific countries who are known to be responsible for serious violations of human rights.
Possible sanctions include denying them visas, banning them from entering the legislating country, freezing their assets and prohibiting them from making property transactions.
The US led the way by adopting the act in 2016, after which Estonia, the UK, Canada, Lithuania and Latvia enacted similar legislation, while other countries, such as France and Australia, are working toward that goal.
Reacting to the European Parliament resolution, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Wang Ding-yu (王定宇) said that these laws sanction powerful human rights violators and can strengthen countries’ national security.
He said that if the whole world joins hands to ensure that those guilty of human rights violations and corruption have nowhere to run, and to stop their assets from circulating, it would be helpful in strengthening their national security and human rights.
“This is a great chapter in the history of human civilization,” Wang said.
Meanwhile, DPP Legislator Lin Chun-hsien (林俊憲) said that the US and European nations have seen the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for what it is and realize that many Chinese officials have hidden large amounts of financial assets in Western countries.
Given this understanding, Lin said that the European Parliament resolution was clearly aimed at China.
In 2017, the government banned three CCP officials known to have been involved in suppressing the Falun Gong spiritual movement from entering Taiwan.
In September of that year, a team of Taiwanese lawyers representing Falun Gong submitted to the US Department of State and the US Congress a list of 40 CCP officials, including former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and Luo Gan (羅幹), former secretary of the CCP’s Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission, who they accused of oppressing Falun Gong.
Taiwan should join this united front alongside some of the world’s main democracies. It should consider drawing up a Magnitsky act, or maybe call it the “Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波) human rights accountability act” in memory of the late Chinese dissident and Nobel Peace Prize winner.
Li Dao-yong is director of the City South Culture and History Studio.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US