Taiwanese university campuses have recently seen several incidents of aggression by groups of Chinese students. They damaged a “Lennon wall” at Soochow University and attacked Hong Kong students at I-Shou University and Chinese Culture University, where they pulled one student down from a high ledge.
University authorities have responded to these incidents along the following lines: The perpetrators are repremanded, they apologize and the school either urges them not do it again or imposes a painless “demerit.”
If schools stick to this pattern, they will be condoning Chinese students’ aggression and opening the door to even more thuggish behavior.
This is not to say that anyone should try to privately punish or attack Chinese students for their aggression.
It means that Taiwan should use more systematic and organized methods to prevent and respond to such incidents.
For example, the government should thoroughly investigate the forces behind such incidents, sternly penalize physical violence and help victims take legal action.
The places where public forums like “Lennon walls” are set up should be key points for maintaining campus security. If such issues are not made safe, such actions would tend to escalate, leading to deeper confrontation and sharper clashes.
As well as reviewing the way individual cases are handled, if viewed from the individuals who are in charge of the universities involved, the responses chosen by the school authorities would not come as a surprise.
Take for example Soochow, which handled the vandalism of its “Lennon wall” by convening a “mediation committee.” This half-hearted response is less surprising when one considers that Soochow president Pan Wei-ta (潘維大) gave a speech about China’s Belt and Road Initiative at a juridical forum on cross-strait peaceful development, a pro-unification event.
Another factor behind the school authorities’ lenient responses might have to do with their efforts to enroll Chinese students.
If we take the number of Chinese students studying at higher education institutions in Taiwan this academic year, as published by the Ministry of Education, and add the number of foreign students taking formal degree courses, we find that Chinese students make up 62 percent of all non-Taiwanese students at Soochow, 10.6 percent at I-Shou, 48.1 percent at Chinese Culture University and 51 percent at Shih Hsin University.
Except for the relatively low proportion at I-Shou, Chinese students account for the bulk of non-Taiwanese students at the other three schools.
It would be no surprise to find that these schools’ inaction or lenient penalties in response to these incidents stem from their anxiety that punishing those responsible could affect their recruitment of Chinese students.
The government must therefore more closely scrutinize Chinese students’ applications, and, if necessary, reduce the quota of students from China to prevent large numbers of Chinese students invading Taiwan’s universities, ostensibly to study, but in reality to promote unification.
As for the schools, they should follow the example of Canada’s McMaster University, which revoked the status of its Chinese Students and Scholars Association for surveilling Chinese students on behalf of the Beijing government.
China has begun promoting unification within Taiwan’s education sector. If the nation keeps turning a blind eye on the grounds of “keeping politics out of the campus,” it will amount to colluding with China’s pro-unification strategy of eroding Taiwan-centric education and freedom of speech.
Allan Hsiao studies political science at Soochow University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
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
RSS