Beginning Jan. 1, Chinese will be able to come to Taiwan for sightseeing. However, there is a catch -- they must be either permanent residents or students in foreign countries. Obviously, this requirement minimizes the impact of this partial opening. However, it is important to keep in mind that China's stubborn refusal to negotiate with the Taiwan government on the issue has prevented a major breakthrough.
Perhaps deliberately, or out of genuine ignorance, critics of the partial opening conveniently forget that it takes two to tango. It is wrong to think that the minute Taiwan rolls out the red carpet, millions of Chinese tourists will swarm in. After all, China still imposes strict controls on international and even domestic travel by its citizens.
In China, even getting a passport is a huge project, riddled with numerous restrictions. For example, to ease the problem of Chinese women working as prostitutes in Southeast Asia, single women not accompanied by their parents are unlikely to be issued a passport. Furthermore, usually only residents of large cities can get passports.
Four years after Hong Kong's handover, China only next month will abolish the quota on Chinese citizens traveling to Hong Kong. The time is ripe to lift the restriction, now that Hong Kong's freedom of speech and rule of law have been watered down so much that Chinese travelers won't be polluted by these "Western poisons." Probably, until Taiwan can live up, or rather down, to China's standard in this regard, China won't expose its people to the "germs" of democracy in Taiwan.
For Chinese residing abroad, it is less of a problem, as they will not be traveling directly from China to Taiwan. Of course, in view of their government's record in arresting on espionage charges Chinese scholars living abroad who have traveled to Taiwan, they should probably think twice before coming here.
Furthermore, restricting the welcome to Chinese living abroad should minimize the number of Chinese tourists seeking to stay here illegally. Had China's government been willing to negotiate with Taiwan's government, the handling of illegal immigrants would present fewer problems. However, since China isn't willing to talk, all Taiwan can do is minimize the number of illegal immigrants this way. After all, Taiwan is already having enough difficulty dealing with an influx of illegal Chinese immigrants without having Chinese tourists here.
It is not exaggerating to say that hundreds of millions of Chinese would emigrate if they had the chance. Once they get away, whether on student visas, temporary work visas, or just tourist visas, they do everything possible to stay away. For example, China's political and religious persecution has victimized many of its people. Many Chinese are so desperate to stay in countries such as the US that they file for political asylum by fabricating stories. This is why a lot of law offices run by ethnic-Chinese in southern California specialize in the handling of political asylum cases. But it is fair to assume that those who have already got out to live in another country are unlikely to want to reside illegally in Taiwan.
Eager to poke holes in every move the government makes, an opposition lawmaker has commented, "How many Chinese residing abroad could there possibly be." The answer is rather a lot. Students from China are the largest group among all the foreign students in the US. Chinese immigrants have taken over San Gabriel, California, formerly known as "Little Taipei" but now more suitably known as "Little Shanghai." Naturally, how many of them want to come and visit Taiwan is another story. But at this point, this partial opening of tourism to Chinese citizens is the best that Taiwan's government could do and to demand more is plain folly.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS