The visit by Hong Kong lawmakers Emily Lau (劉慧卿) and James To (涂謹申) last weekend doesn't seem to have gone down too well among the territory's officialdom. The China Daily, a mouthpiece for the Beijing government, said in its Hong Kong edition that their visit was exactly why the Article 23 anti-subversion law must be passed as soon as possible. Special vitriol was reserved for Lau, who apparently has committed what in the eyes of the China Daily is the greatest sin of all, commenting unfavorably on "one country, two systems." To the powers that be in both Beijing and Hong Kong it is considered a scandal that opposition lawmakers might go to another country and criticize the government.
Hard to imagine what lengths they might go to if they had to put up with the likes of KMT Legislator John Chang (章孝嚴), who tripped off to the US last year to tell everyone who would listen that Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) government was incompetent and irresponsible and that they should wait for the KMT's restoration before making fresh commitments to Taiwan.
But the criticism of Lau gets stronger. That Lau said Taiwan's independence should be determined by the Taiwanese is taken as extraordinarily shocking.
"By the same token, tomorrow she would most probably incite a referendum to decide on Hong Kong's independence and commit the crime of secession.
"In view of this development, the national security law must be enacted and it must be done as soon as possible," the voice of officialdom writes.
The absurdities should be obvious. The idea behind "one country, two systems" was after all that Hong Kong was supposed to be governed by its residents. When this formula was put forward it was suppose to -- and did -- delude people into thinking that there would be some degree of popular democracy involved. Of course this was not to be, and a fairer description of the current situation is Hong Kong people governed by Hong Kong toadies of Beijing selected by another group of Beijing toadies.
But it is the China Daily's fulmination about a referendum that is the real thigh-slapper here. As if to blacken Lau's name, we are told that she might do the terrible thing of suggesting that Hong Kong people be consulted over their political future. And she might even advise them that this future might be rosier outside of the embrace of the motherland. Good God! Are there no limits to this depravity?
The unpalatable truth is of course that the people of Hong Kong were never asked what they wanted; they were just a football to be kicked between London and Beijing. It is to the eternal dishonor of the British that their last shabby act of empire was to reach a deal with Beijing over Hong Kong without consulting its people. And this was "justified" to the rest of the world by the offensive claim that the people were not interested in politics. And now the Daily insinuates that to suggest that Hong Kong people should be asked about their future is exactly the kind of subversion that makes it vital to pass a law that residents of the territory have categorically rejected -- a law criminalizing the very suggestion that people should be consulted.
For Taiwan this would be laughable were it not that the same "one country, two systems" formula is touted as a "solution" for Taiwan-China relations and that some local politicians seem to think that it might well be the road to take. Hong Kongers aren't to be allowed to question the wisdom of their shotgun wedding with China. Will Taiwanese be allowed to? Will they be asked if they want to? For the very freedom to do this, the freedom to argue on this topic, is, after all, the essence of Taiwan's liberty.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS