There have been reports of increasing numbers of Taiwanese going missing in China. One major case was the detention of Taiwanese human rights advocate Lee Ming-che (李明哲), and now China has confirmed that it has detained Taiwan Union of Cross-strait Relations Associations chairman Tsai Chin-shu (蔡金樹).
The Straits Exchange Foundation revealed that it has processed 149 cases of Taiwanese nationals who have gone missing in China since May 2016. Of these, 67 have disappeared without a trace. No one knows what fate has befallen them.
It is simply astonishing that so many Taiwanese have gone missing in China over the past three years. In any other free, democratic nation, if even two or three nationals had gone missing there would have been an uproar. By contrast, in Taiwan it seems that people accept this state of affairs as completely normal. It is enough to make one see red.
Personal safety is a basic human right. Taiwan is a free, democratic nation that upholds human rights. In dealing with the Chinese communists, who do as they please, the government has signed a cross-strait judicial mutual assistance agreement, but it does appear that this agreement is, for all intents and purposes, dead in the water. It seems Taipei’s options are extremely limited when Taiwanese go missing in China.
In addition to looking into the 67 missing Taiwanese in China, the government should also endeavor to find out more about the remainder of the nearly 150 cases so that it can be determined who they are and the circumstances in which they went missing. Were they in China on business or for leisure? Were they visiting family or working? Where and when did they go missing?
Individual trails might go cold, but at least the information obtained would provide a better understanding of what is going on. If Taiwanese had a better understanding of the basic details behind the missing cases, they could at least have a more heightened sense of the potential dangers of going to China.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle should look into doing something about the 149 missing cases. If they cannot guarantee the personal safety of Republic of China citizens, how can they talk about improving their lives?
Ho Hua-kuo is a retired professor of National Chiayi University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has
RSS