Authorities on Monday cautioned China-based Taiwanese artists Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜) and Angela Chang (張韶涵) against taking part in China’s National Day celebrations on Wednesday.
The Mainland Affairs Council said it was investigating whether such behavior constitutes a contravention of the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例).
Beijing might have wanted Taiwanese artists to perform at the event to promote its “one country, two systems” formula, which China intends to apply to Taiwan at some point, the council said.
Its intentions when engaging with Taiwanese artists are without a doubt part of its “united front” tactics, clearly being a national security concern. Some younger Taiwanese who are fans of these artists might not fully understand the implications of singing patriotic songs at a Chinese event and wonder whether China’s claims over Taiwan are valid. That is why a strong governmental response is so important — it would show that the artists’ behavior was not acceptable and cannot be a model for other artists to emulate.
However, there is an arguably even greater threat stemming from the large number of Taiwanese who visit, work and live in China, whose behavior while there is out of the public eye and goes unnoticed by Taiwanese authorities.
It should remain in the public consciousness that Taiwan is still technically at civil war with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) — hostilities never formally ceased, and although Taiwanese authorities no longer have ambitions in China, the CCP’s ambitions in Taiwan have grown bolder in the past few years.
Beijing’s “united front” efforts include attempts to poach Taiwanese talent, which have become more aggressive since 2018 when China introduced its “31 incentives.” Given Taiwan’s aging population, a brain drain amounts to a national security threat, similar to that posed by China’s attempts to acquire national secrets by bribing current and former Taiwanese officials.
These are all good reasons to restrict the activity of Taiwanese in China.
A common argument by people with dubious interests in China is that Taiwan’s democratic government cannot prevent people engaging in activities across the Taiwan Strait. However, democratic governments often place restrictions on their citizens in the interest of the nation as a whole.
The US government has imposed restrictions on travel to Cuba since 1963. Today, Americans can visit Cuba only under very specific circumstances, such as to engage in humanitarian work, or to visit family — and Americans are not permitted to engage in business with Cuban government-run businesses or to stay at government-run hotels.
Taiwanese authorities recognize China as a threat — or, at least the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) does — but the DPP’s responses are reactive, rather than preventive. Why does it allow Taiwanese to freely engage in work and travel in China and only later raise questions about their activities there?
In China, all activities by foreigners — including Taiwanese — are closely monitored by the government. Foreigners cannot benefit from their activities in China unless the Chinese government also benefits from them. Therefore, how can any exchanges or activities by Taiwanese in China be considered non-political or non-threatening to Taiwan?
Rather than leaving it to artists to decide whether they will engage in pro-unification activities in China, why not remove the choice altogether and restrict travel to China by ordinary citizens?
The best way to protect Taiwanese interests would be to prevent engagements with China, pending either a formal armistice or Chinese recognition of Taiwanese sovereignty.
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
RSS