Since the Chinese National People’s Congress Standing Committee passed the Hong Kong National Security Law on June 30 last year and it came into force in the territory that same day, merely campaigning for Hong Kong’s prior democracy and freedoms can result in being arrested for “inciting subversion of state power.”
After the COVID-19 pandemic ended mass protests against a proposed legal amendment that would have made it possible for Hong Kongers to be extradited to China, there have been numerous acts of retribution against democracy advocates.
In such a tense and fearful atmosphere, Hong Kong residents can face severe penalties under the National Security Law just for celebrating the Republic of China’s (ROC) Double Ten National Day.
The Sing Tao Daily on Thursday last week reported that Hong Kong Secretary for Security Chris Tang (鄧炳強) warned the public not to engage in Double Ten activities aimed at “separating Taiwan from China,” or the authorities would strictly enforce the National Security Law.
Even celebrating the ROC’s National Day would seem to contravene the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) dogma with regard to Taiwanese independence. This is reminiscent of the incident involving Taiwanese actress Janine Chang (張鈞甯), who was labeled a Taiwanese independence supporter for having mentioned the ROC in her master’s degree thesis and was subject to a storm of critical comments online.
During debates in the buildup to the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) chairperson election, which took place on Sept. 25, all four candidates stated that they would defend the ROC.
Considering that the CCP regards celebrating the ROC’s National Day by Hong Kong residents as a secessionist activity, would KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) dare to speak out loudly and clearly for the ROC?
Would Chu dare to insist that the so-called “1992 consensus” includes not just “one China,” but also “each side having its own interpretation of what China means”?
In the eyes of the KMT, is the People’s Republic of China or the ROC China’s rightful regime?
Chu cannot dodge this question.
Continued vagueness on the question will obviously not win the trust of Taiwanese and if Chu thinks that he can speak up for the ROC without upsetting the CCP, he will find that there is no longer room for vagueness.
The CCP views anything other than annexation as Taiwan independence. Given this, will the KMT continue shackling itself with the ROC — which is a type of Taiwanese independence — while still pretending to be against Taiwanese independence?
As the KMT will be labeled as pro-independence no matter what it does — and given that it has no chance of defeating the CCP so that it could regain the right to govern China — the party will not get anywhere by continuing to advocate for the ROC.
In such a dead-end situation, the KMT might as well give up on its unrealistic “Chinese dream” and concentrate on thinking about how to achieve independence for Taiwan.
Pan Kuan took part in the 2014 Sunflower movement.
Translated by Julian Clegg
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS