Why is the government stalling over the case of Xu Bo (
We have heard a number of different reasons why a decision on Xu's case has taken so long. First we were told that, since he was traveling on a false passport, there was a question of identity. That question having been resolved, we were then told that there was nevertheless doubt as to whether Xu was a genuine escapee from political persecution. Xiang Lin (
After his 30,000-character book on the Tiananmen crisis, Red Fascist, irked Beijing's red fascists, Xu fled China's security state in 1999 and sought refuge in South Korea. There he was granted refugee status by the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), which asked the South Korean government not to deport him. But he also received less-than-welcome attention from Seoul's National Intelligence Service which labeled him "an anti-establishment activist" and sought his deportation, irrespective of UNHCR's request. Fearing that it was just a matter of time before the South Koreans sent him back to China, Xu hopped on a plane to Thailand that stopped over in Taipei, and asked for asylum here.
Xu's problem, the government now says, is that this country has no asylum law -- you can't claim asylum because the nation doesn't recognize the concept. This seems strange when one considers that the ROC is itself an exile from China. It seems downright reprehensible when one considers how many leading lights of the DPP have themselves spent time in political exile. When the DPP came to power it promised an emphasis on human rights and a shakeup of the legal system according to that agenda. This has yet to come.
This is the second time in less than six months that Taiwan's lip-service-only attitude to human rights has been on display. Last October Tang Yuanjun (
It is interesting to note the silence of the pan-blue camp on the fate of these dissidents. The only politicians who have shown any concern are from the TSU. There was a a time when the pan-blue camp would welcome "anti-communist heroes." Now it is conspiring with China in the destruction of this nation's democracy, it isn't interested.
But the real source of disgust over this country's attitude to both Xu and Tang comes from the suspicion that the reluctance to take them in comes from a desire to appease China. If so then this attitude can only be roundly condemned. It is deplorable if this nation is prepared to trade human-rights principles for a cozier relationship with the dictators next door. Let's be honest: the democratization of China, the replacement of the vicious clique that tyrannizes that luckless foreign land by a democracy is, along with the US Seventh Fleet, probably Taiwan's only long- term hope. There is a natural unity of interest between the dissidents and this country. That the government cannot find a place for them here is a scandal.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS