Article 29 of the Criminal Code states that “a person who solicits another to commit an offense is a solicitor. A solicitor shall be punished according to the punishment prescribed for the solicited offense.”
Academic Lai Yueh-tchienn (賴岳謙) said on China Central Television that “Taiwan’s military is just a paper tiger,” that its weapons arsenal is decades behind China’s, its training is weak and its officers’ ideas are based on a 50-year-old ideology instead of modern thinking.
Former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) on Chinese TV called for “unification” by military force, saying that Beijing’s missiles should be aimed at the worst Taiwan independence activist, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文).
China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) founder Chang An-le (張安樂) — also known as the “White Wolf” — said that he would establish “red troops” to promote “peaceful unification.”
He also called for an “uprising before the battle” and cooperation with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to overturn the Taiwanese government.
When all these things occurred, these people were not only solicitors, they were also guilty of treason.
Promoting the demise of Taiwan and encouraging China’s annexation of the nation by military force are not covered by freedom of expression.
These people should not be allowed to talk such nonsense and be tolerated based on the idea that the public should independently make up their mind about the comments.
Legal professionals dealing with false news and rumormongering should not ignore them and issue “not guilty” verdicts, saying that the comments have not incited any social unrest.
Faced with the Chinese dictatorship, democratic countries around the world are on their guard against Beijing’s aggression.
An increasing number of states are working together to form an alliance to contain China.
A meeting of top US and Japanese leaders last month condemned the threat posed by China’s military actions, calling them destabilizing.
However, there is a group of people in Taiwan who chime in with anything China says.
They hold high the banner of “freedom of expression” as a protective umbrella, while working to destroy national unity, promote rumors and create unrest.
Lai, a former university professor, has become a mouthpiece for China, and CUPP members have on multiple occasions — here in free and democratic Taiwan — attacked Lam Wing-kei (林榮基), a former manager of Hong Kong’s Causeway Bay Books, as well as Hong Kong singer, actor and democracy campaigner Denise Ho (何韻詩), pouring red paint over them.
These people are also using Taiwan’s freedom of expression as a protective umbrella as they work to suppress the same freedom on behalf of the CCP, a party that regards freedom of expression as a crime.
This issue, rooted in the tragic mess that surrounds Taiwan’s national identity, is a reminder that Taiwanese must protect their freedom of expression.
Chin Ching is an educator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
US President Joe Biden’s administration continues to build on the unprecedented efforts of former US president Donald Trump’s team to deepen US relations with Taiwan. Without either administration explicitly declaring it, their combined policies have effectively transformed Washington’s ritualistic “one China” formula, while paying it deferential lip service. The two administrations have instituted policies that de facto nullify one of the “three noes” that then-US president Bill Clinton affirmed during his 1998 visit to Beijing: no Taiwanese independence; no “two Chinas”; no “one China, one Taiwan”; and no participation in most international organizations. (Actually four noes.) Last month, Washington opened a new
Despite the complicated legacy of colonialism, relations between Taipei and Tokyo continue to blossom in these troubled times. As East Asia continues to battle the COVID-19 pandemic and struggles to contain an increasingly aggressive China, our democratic archipelago benefits from a new high in its security relations with Japan. Remarkably, with its generous vaccine diplomacy and the unprecedented explicit mention of the situation surrounding Taiwan in Japan’s annual defense white paper, Tokyo began to embrace a novel, two-track, comprehensive approach for engaging Taiwan. The first track deals with non-traditional security such as public health and vaccine donations. Japan has generously supported
As the incursions by China into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone intensify, the international community’s anxiety has risen over the question of whether the US military would become directly involved in the case of an attack on Taiwan. Washington’s long-held policy of “strategic ambiguity” does little to ease the trepidation. The rationale universally espoused on “strategic ambiguity” is that an announced commitment from Washington to directly defend Taiwan would encourage Taiwanese independence and consequently bring forth a Chinese military attack and a possible nuclear confrontation between two superpowers. However, this line of argument could soon lose steam if the subject is viewed from
In an unprecedented move, a group of democratic nations led by the US, UK and EU in a joint statement on Tuesday accused the Chinese Ministry of State Security of having carried out a major cyberattack earlier this year and stealing data from at least 30,000 organizations worldwide, including governments, universities and firms in key industries. Western officials were reportedly perplexed by the attack’s brazen execution and unparalleled scale. In an article on the attack, BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera wrote: “Western spies are still struggling to understand why Chinese behavior has changed.” The attack raises the fear “that they [China]