Former premier Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) was on Wednesday able to laugh it off when his account on Chinese microblogging Web site Sina Weibo was shut down less than 24 hours after he made it public.
The suspension did not come as a surprise, as people know how tightly the Chinese government runs its Internet controls and clamps down on free speech, but this was special because it happened to Hsieh.
Hsieh’s China policy is widely considered the most moderate among senior Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) politicians and he became the first DPP heavyweight to visit China last year.
Beijing, which appeared to be ready for closer engagement with the independence-minded DPP, extended its goodwill by sending several high-ranking officials to meet Hsieh, who, conversely, was criticized by many of his fellow party members for “kowtowing to China” during the trip.
That explains why the case is so symbolic to Taiwanese, some of whom still expect Beijing to change its stance on reconciliation across the Taiwan Strait, and it was, perhaps, a stupid move by the Chinese government, which says it wants to “win the hearts of Taiwanese compatriots.”
In his Sina Weibo messages, Hsieh had been treading carefully around sensitive topics that might trigger Beijing’s censorship. He wrote about freedom of speech, but did not mention Taiwanese independence, Tibetan affairs or Falun Gong, topics likely to rile Beijing.
However, that was not enough to spare his account, which had more than 60,000 followers within hours of his public announcement of its existence.
No one understands what Beijing’s Internet controls are all about better than the Chinese themselves, with many saying they had been waiting for Hsieh’s account to be axed.
The suspension of Hsieh’s account made it even more difficult for Taiwanese to trust the Chinese government.
“If the government could not even tolerate Hsieh’s comments, I don’t know how it could convince Taiwanese [about unification],” a Sina Weibo user wrote.
Taiwanese seem to be trapped between conflicting thoughts about the emerging China. On one hand, they fantasize about the sheer size and potential of the Chinese market, with more young Taiwanese saying they are willing to move to China for better career opportunities and a higher salary, while on the other they know very well what is happening across the Taiwan Strait with regards to the lack of free speech and political oppression.
Beijing seems to believe that economic and political development can be separated. Particularly, freedom of speech is considered an “internal affair” in which other nations should not interfere.
However, the stakes are much higher for Taiwanese than nationals of other countries, who, to some degree, can separate doing business and the lack of respect of basic human rights in China.
For the million Taiwanese currently working and living in China, their freedom of speech and personal safety face the same threats as those of Chinese.
The people of Taiwan are increasingly concerned about Chinese influence in the media and the self-censorship of government officials, who seem to be avoiding topics that could offend Beijing.
The Hsieh incident is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of Taiwanese concerns about what their future would be like if unification occurred or Beijing’s influence on Taipei became too strong to ignore.
It also serves as a reminder for Taiwanese about the significance of making basic human rights and values the basis of cross-strait engagements. After all, Hsieh could apply for a new Sina Weibo account, but the loss of freedom of speech is not as easy to rectify.
During the US-India Strategic Partnership Forum’s third leadership summit on Aug. 31, US Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun said that the US wants to partner with the other members of the Quadrilaterial Security Dialogue — Australia, India and Japan — to establish an organization similar to NATO, to “respond to ... any potential challenge from China.” He said that the US’ purpose is to work with these nations and other countries in the Indo-Pacific region to “create a critical mass around the shared values and interest of those parties,” and possibly attract more countries to establish an alliance comparable to
On August 24, 2020, the US Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, made an important statement: “The Pentagon is Prepared for China.” Going forward, how might the Department of Defense team up with Taiwan to make itself even more prepared? No American wants to deter the next war by a paper-thin margin, and no one appreciates the value of strategic overmatch more than the war planners at the Pentagon. When the stakes are this high, you can bet they want to be super ready. In recent months, we have witnessed a veritable flood of high-level statements from US government leaders on
China has long sought shortcuts to developing semiconductor technologies and local supply chains by poaching engineers and experts from Taiwan and other nations. It is also suspected of stealing trade secrets from Taiwanese and US firms to fulfill its ambition of becoming a major player in the global semiconductor industry in the next decade. However, it takes more than just money and talent to build a semiconductor supply chain like the one which Taiwan and the US started to cultivate more than 30 years ago. Amid rising trade and technology tensions between the world’s two biggest economies, Beijing has become
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new