To understand the stark differences between China and Taiwan, you need look no further than the nearest newsstand.
In Taiwan's young democracy, you will find newspapers with an array of editorial positions covering the political spectrum. You will see articles accusing the nation's highest officials and most powerful magnates of corruption, lechery, vice and incompetence. You will see energetic and unruly activity that may be undisciplined and unprofessional, but nevertheless has all the hallmarks of a free press.
Go now to a newsstand in China.
You will find articles lauding the accomplishments of unelected bureaucrats. You will find pieces extolling the intricacies of official policies. You will find xenophobic rants aimed at inflaming nationalist sentiment. In short, you will find evidence of all that is frightening and detestable in a totalitarian regime.
Yesterday, that detestable regime sentenced a journalist to five years in prison for allegedly spying for Taiwan. His real crime, as everyone knows, was trying to write accurately about China.
Ching Cheong (
Since Ching was tried in secret, and no one knows what "evidence" was used to convict him, it is difficult to contest the case against him. But it is not difficult to see that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) had an urgent and unambiguous reason to try to discredit Ching and stop his activities.
According to the CCP's mouthpiece news agency, Xinhua, China largely based its claim that Ching was a spy on "evidence" that he had met with members of a think tank -- which the reports described as a front for espionage -- when he was a reporter in Taiwan. Xinhua says that Ching took money from the think tank in exchange for providing "state secrets." There is no way to check the veracity of these claims, and it is unlikely that more details will be forthcoming.
Given the nature of the Chinese regime, it is irrelevant if Ching violated the law. The laws that Beijing applies to such matters are so sweeping that they could be applied to any journalist who writes about anything at any time.
Every so often, commentators and pundits will wax eloquent and talk about the "inevitable" slow shift toward an open, democratic society that they claim China is beginning to undergo. They point to critical blogs or articles that appear from time to time as evidence of this shift.
This ignores reality. Such criticisms appear because technology has changed, not because the nature of the Chinese regime has changed. A journalist in China can write honestly and critically for a short time, and these words will spread like wildfire on the Internet. But in the end, the plodding government goons will show up at the door, shut it all down and whisk the writer away.
Reporters Without Borders says that China has 32 journalists and 50 "Internet campaigners" in jail. Ching is just the latest in a long series of persecuted journalists. The CCP isn't changing.
Singapore Press Holdings Ltd, the firm that owns the Straits Times, has called for Beijing to release Ching because he has chronic health problems.
It isn't likely that support from the Taipei Times would add value to this effort in China's eyes, but we do call on the international community -- especially the US and the EU -- to increase pressure on China for its oppression of journalists and to push for Ching's release.
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
As the war in Burma stretches into its 76th year, China continues to play both sides. Beijing backs the junta, which seized power in the 2021 coup, while also funding some of the resistance groups fighting the regime. Some suggest that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is hedging his bets, positioning China to side with the victors regardless of the outcome. However, a more accurate explanation is that China is acting pragmatically to safeguard its investments and ensure the steady flow of natural resources and energy for its economy. China’s primary interest is stability and supporting the junta initially seemed like the best
Numerous expert analyses characterize today’s US presidential election as a risk for Taiwan, given that the two major candidates, US Vice President Kamala Harris and former US president Donald Trump, are perceived to possess divergent foreign policy perspectives. If Harris is elected, many presume that the US would maintain its existing relationship with Taiwan, as established through the American Institute in Taiwan, and would continue to sell Taiwan weapons and equipment to help it defend itself against China. Under the administration of US President Joe Biden, whose political views Harris shares, the US on Oct. 25 authorized arms transfers to Taiwan, another