The Executive Yuan on July 6 passed a draft amendment to the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) to restrict the involvement of retired civil servants and military brass in political activities in China, and will send it to the Legislative Yuan for review.
The draft states that all former ministers and vice ministers of defense, foreign, mainland and security affairs, lieutenant generals and above, and the heads of intelligence agencies may not take part in political activities hosted by Chinese leaders in China within 15 years of their retirement, nor may they harm national dignity by saluting China’s flag, emblems and anthem or by singing songs that symbolize the Chinese regime.
If approved by the legislature, violators could have their monthly pensions suspended and forfeit their medals of honor.
The amendment was drafted after retired lieutenant general Wu Sz-huai (吳斯懷) and other retired military officers attended a ceremony in Beijing to mark the 150th anniversary of Sun Yat-sen’s (孫逸仙) birthday in November last year. They stood respectfully to listen to the Chinese national anthem and to a speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
Media reports of the incident caused a sensation and triggered calls for amending the law to prevent a recurrence of such actions.
Wu at the time criticized the government’s decision to amend the law and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) said that since Wu and the others had reported their trips to the authorities in advance and the two sides of the Taiwan Strait should support celebrations of Sun’s birthday, the government should not exaggerate the issue or attack specific groups.
Ironically, in his speech at the event Xi had emphasized that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was the most loyal inheritor of Sun’s revolutionary cause.
What will Wu and the KMT think about Beijing’s fight for the right of historical discourse? This is perhaps the most merciless slap in the face of their “Huangpu spirit.”
Civil servants and military officers are government employees and their loyalty to the nation should therefore be much clearer and more explicit than that of the general public.
It is a pity that from the confrontation between the KMT’s mainstream and non-mainstream factions during Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) presidency in the 1990s to the confrontation between the pan-blue and pan-green camps during former presidents Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) and Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) terms in office, some government employees demonstrated a lack of national loyalty, as they leaned toward China because of their unhappiness with Taiwan’s domestic politics.
Moreover, since the related laws are rather loose, some former civil servants and military officers who frequently travel across the Taiwan Strait have been lured over by the enemy, to the detriment of Taiwan.
The behavior of some retired generals in particular has been questionable. Prior to retirement, they pledged to safeguard the Republic of China (ROC), but are echoing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) stance in retirement — even though the PRC wants to eliminate the ROC. They cling to their generous pensions, while mobilizing the so-called “800 warriors” to protest pension reform.
To be blunt, where is their military spirit and morals?
It remains to be seen whether passage of the amendment will serve as a warning because China is able to provide greater rewards to lure them over. Moreover, the penalties for Taiwanese recruited by China are minor, which means the low risk is virtually tantamount to encouraging treason.
For example, retired vice admiral Ko Cheng-sheng (柯政盛), who was found guilty of recruiting naval officers to spy for China was given just a 14-month prison term. Ko was prosecuted for violating the National Security Act (國家安全法), instead of offenses against the internal and external security of the state or corruption during active service. So he will continue to receive his pension.
Compare Ko’s treatment with that meted out to Taiwan-born US Navy Lieutenant Commander Edward Lin (林介良), who, after reaching a plea deal with the US government on spying charges, was sentenced to six years in prison and forfeiture of his pensions and other benefits.
How can the insignificant penalties handed out in Taiwan prevent anyone from committing such a crime?
Taiwanese must develop national awareness and be able to differentiate between ourselves and our enemies.
First, although Taiwan has ended the Period of National Mobilization for Suppression of the Communist Rebellion (動員戡亂時期), China will never give up its threat to eliminate Taiwan by force.
As the essence of the relationship between the enemy and Taiwan remains unchanged, we must not believe that growing cross-strait exchanges mean peace has arrived.
Next, Taiwan and China are two nations on the two sides of the Strait, and cross-strait relations are certainly not internal affairs within a single state. Civil servants and military officers should be fully aware of this and avoid the misconception of the two sides belonging to “one China,” or that both the ROC and PRC militaries are Chinese troops.
At the moment, from the Presidential Office to the Mainland Affairs Council, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of National Defense, the authorities often refer to China as the “Chinese mainland” or the “mainland side.” Does this not set a bad example for civil servants and military officers in terms of their national identity?
When the authorities express their “goodwill” by referring to China as the “Chinese mainland” or the “mainland side,” how can they stop civil servants and military officers from further realizing such goodwill?
In recent years, former civil servants and military officers traveling to China and even Taiwanese spies recruited by Beijing like to brag about safeguarding the homeland, revitalizing the nation and seeking peace, and how their actions comply with the “one China” principle.
The problem is Taiwan is now a shared community formed through its democratization by its 23.5 million citizens. Taiwanese are under an autonomous rule, and the younger generation mostly support Taiwanese independence regardless of their family heritage or political affiliations. In terms of unification, whether by choice or by force, China is likely to swallow Taiwan.
Today, the definition of Taiwan-China relations should no longer be ROC-PRC relations under the structure stemming from a “one China” civil war.
Taiwan’s leader, elected through the democratic process, should ensure the overall national goal and realize the vision of the mainstream opinion, while leading civil servants and military officers in pledging loyalty solely to this land and its people. Then, Taiwan can turn into a “normal country” through reform.
Translated by Eddy Chang
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which
RSS