When Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Joseph Wu (吳釗燮) inspected the Chinglu Detention Center for illegal Chinese immigrants in Hsinchu on June 15, he called on China to improve its efforts to halt the flood of illegal immigrants and for the two sides to sign an agreement dealing with their return to China, in an attempt at eliminating the problem once and for all. Wu correctly pointed out that the problem cannot be resolved by Taiwan alone.
This is yet another sign of goodwill on Taiwan's part, yet a solution relies not only on political forces on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, but also on social forces.
Is is absolutely not a matter of what President Chen Shui-bian (
Whether they come here of their own accord and the question of rights for sex workers are issues which simply do not arise, because this is not a free market, but a brutally controlled human meat market. Approximately 2,000 illegal immigrants are caught every year, but the actual number of people who are brought here illegally is much higher.
The existence of such a market shames both the Taiwanese and Chinese societies. Taiwan creates the demand, and China meets it. The underworld and corrupt forces in civil society in China and Taiwan run this market together. For political reasons, China's passivity in bringing these illegal immigrants home reveals the government's attitude toward its own people.
And what about Taiwan? As people are continually exposed to news reports about illegal immigrants being mistreated by boat crews and police using prostitutes to make an extra dollar, public curiosity in these Chinese women gradually abates and people begin to ignore the issue, telling themselves that these women belong to another, underground society, totally unrelated to their own lives.
China's reluctance to have these people returned adds to the misfortunes of the 1,000 to 2,000 people in Taiwanese detention centers. But shouldn't Taiwanese society also take the initiative to eliminate this inhumane market? The theory of supply and demand can only explain existing phenomena, but progressive social forces can actively change phenomena.
Tolerating the existence of such an exploitative, inhumane market further erodes the benevolent foundations of Taiwanese society. Maybe the human meat market will not enter your community, work place or social circles, but it exists in Taiwan, and it is expanding.
Not only does the political tension between China and Taiwan allow the two sides to ignore the responsibility of finding solutions to jointly created social problems, it has also become the force underlying the emergence of new problems. China allows Taiwanese gangsters to settle down in China, and during the recent presidential election, they were even allowed to organize. China's behavior will not only cost Taiwan and the cross-strait relationship dearly. These criminal forces will also erode Chinese society, leading to worsening bureaucratic rule and abuse of the public. Would a rational and responsible government try to destroy an opponent at the cost of throwing its own people into crisis?
Civil society on either side of the Taiwan Strait may have different views on the unification-independence issue, but based on a common belief in progress and a humane society, they should solve issues harmful to both societies together and share their common social values.
The exploitative human meat market and domineering criminal gangs should not be allowed, and the arms race's guarantee of mutual destruction is a price that must be paid by several generations of people. Progressive forces in both societies must take the initiative to suppress evil and create good conditions.
If they don't, a price will have to be paid by the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. Although the two sides have different political ideals, they should share the dream of progress.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
Translated by Perry Svensson
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
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
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
RSS