Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Wang Mei-hui (王美惠) last month proposed canceling the pensions of retired military personnel who are found to have collaborated with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Wang said that retired generals who act as mouthpieces for the CCP might endanger national security, citing retired air force general Hsia Ying-chou’s (夏瀛洲) interview last month with China’s Global Times as an example of the CCP’s use of collaborators in Taiwan.
During the interview with the newspaper on Nov. 5, Hsia said: “Beijing has every right to send warplanes into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone, as it is part of Chinese territory.”
Wang also suggested fines up to NT$10 million (US$359,582) for people found committing such acts.
However, whether a pension cut or fines would do much to deter such actions depends on the motivations of those involved.
Retired military or government officials working with the CCP might be motivated by money, they might have ideological motivations or they might have grievances with the military or government.
In some cases, fines or even commutable jail time might not deter them, and in the case of financial motivation it is unlikely that a fine would concern them, as China has shown that it is willing to finance the activities of Taiwanese collaborators.
Retired officials who have had access to sensitive information are prohibited from visiting China for three years following the end of their service, but this only prevents them from attending events in China. With modern technology it is quite easy for a pensioner to transmit sensitive documents to the CCP over the Internet, or to be interviewed by Chinese media through voice chat or video conferencing. It is also unlikely that the government of a democracy such as Taiwan could effectively prevent such online interviews without infringing upon personal liberties.
What investigators could do is to keep a watch on the financial accounts of pensioners of interest, looking for signs of questionable activity.
However, such monitoring would likely require a warrant. If investigators are to convince judges that there is reasonable cause to issue a warrant, the extent of the threat to national security must be assessed. One argument might be that a retired general who collaborates with China would damage morale among serving military officers.
However, employing such measures against retired military personnel would sow fear among serving officers or potential recruits, who might worry that even in retirement they could not express themselves.
The use of disinformation and other “united front” tactics by China is of growing concern, but it is also imperative that the protection of democracy does not become a justification for its erosion. The argument that a military officer should not be allowed to support the nation’s enemy upon exiting the military is understandable, but some might question the greater implications for free speech.
There is no question that it is bad optics for a retired general to support the enemy, but it is arguably worse to strip their right to dissent.
Lawmakers should focus their efforts on legislation that would more strictly punish those who share state secrets with China, or otherwise engage in activity that sabotages Taiwan’s industry or defense.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
As an American living in Taiwan, I have to confess how impressed I have been over the years by the Chinese Communist Party’s wholehearted embrace of high-speed rail and electric vehicles, and this at a time when my own democratic country has chosen a leader openly committed to doing everything in his power to put obstacles in the way of sustainable energy across the board — and democracy to boot. It really does make me wonder: “Are those of us right who hold that democracy is the right way to go?” Has Taiwan made the wrong choice? Many in China obviously
About 6.1 million couples tied the knot last year, down from 7.28 million in 2023 — a drop of more than 20 percent, data from the Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs showed. That is more serious than the precipitous drop of 12.2 percent in 2020, the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. As the saying goes, a single leaf reveals an entire autumn. The decline in marriages reveals problems in China’s economic development, painting a dismal picture of the nation’s future. A giant question mark hangs over economic data that Beijing releases due to a lack of clarity, freedom of the press
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to