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
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS