Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chen Ming-tong (陳明通) on Thursday said that the government had received asylum applications from at least 200 Hong Kongers as Beijing seeks to ram through a national security bill for the territory.
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has said that there is no need to introduce refugee legislation to offer Hong Kongers asylum, while Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) has said the Act Governing Relations With Hong Kong and Macau (香港澳門關係條例) does not need to be amended to deal with such requests.
However, refugee bills sponsored by Democratic Progressive Party lawmakers have languished for 15 years, while the Hong Kong and Macau law lacks regulations regarding asylum.
Article 18 of the act, which officials have cited as the legal basis for offering Hong Kongers asylum, only states that the council may provide Hong Kong residents whose safety and freedom have been threatened due to political reasons with assistance if necessary, without specifying the conditions that applicants must meet.
This could lead to problems when the council and the National Immigration Agency review an applicant’s background. For example, could asylum be granted to an applicant with a criminal record, or must they have no criminal record going back 12 months from the date of application?
If the latter were the case, it would defeat the purpose of offering asylum for political reasons, as they could have been charged as dissidents by the Hong Kong government.
The political leanings of asylum seekers should also be reviewed to sift out those who have engaged in rhetoric or actions in support of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This might sound politically incorrect, but with the government grappling with national and social security threats posed by groups that promote unification, the last thing Taiwan needs is more CCP supporters who could erode national security.
Given that wealthy Hong Kongers are more likely to have close ties with the Chinese government, making them less likely to seek asylum, Taipei should consider whether the investment threshold of NT$6 million (US$200,321) to qualify for residency could shut out Hong Kongers who need it the most.
Taiwan and Hong Kong face a similar challenge, as they are both at risk of being controlled by the CCP. Only by accepting allies who champion democratic values will Taiwan remain a haven for Hong Kongers who are brave enough to stand up against the despotism of the CCP.
The government has shied away from enacting refugee legislation, as Beijing might interpret it as a step toward statehood. This discreteness has prompted Tsai’s administration to refrain from pushing legislation to remove the phrase “unification of the nation” from 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) or change how the Constitution defines the nation’s territory.
However, at issue is humanitarian assistance, which transcends politics. Making a stand for human rights would win Taiwan international praise and further consolidate its status as a beacon of democracy. Beijing would be hard pressed to justify any brash response to Taipei passing a refugee law.
With US President Donald Trump’s administration adopting a confrontational China policy, Taiwan should seek Washington’s support to introduce refugee legislation to break from the restrictions imposed by Beijing to limit Taiwan’s self-determination.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath