Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators are scrambling in a “pro-China operatives” game, separately introducing prioritized bills, such as one aimed at relaxing restrictions on Chinese spouses of Taiwanese, which would reduce the number of years needed to become a naturalized citizen to four from six.
However, same-sex couples have been left by the wayside.
Today, Taiwanese can register their same-sex marriage with nationals from nearly any country, with the lone exception of China.
Due to the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (兩岸人民關係條例) and the strained relationship between Taiwan and China, same-sex marriages are closed off to cross-strait couples.
Taiwanese-Chinese same-sex marriages have fallen victim to the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) policy of opposing everything related to China, creating a human rights orphan in the process. It is an unfortunate choice given the achievement of legalizing same-sex marriage under President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文).
Former premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) and former legislator Yu Mei-nu (尤美女), both of the DPP, have written articles and talked about the hardships, courage and insight of legalizing same-sex marriage, yet they never mentioned the omission of this human rights angle on the issue.
Under the DPP-led administration, in which there is often discussion around resisting China and anti-China consciousness, cross-strait same-sex couples have been left in a bind where they are allowed to love, but not marry. The DPP has forgotten that human rights should transcend ideologies.
Meanwhile, the KMT and TPP are treating heterosexual Chinese spouses as their legislative baby, whether it be through candidacies such as the, ultimately withdrawn, TPP legislator-at-large nominee Xu Chunying (徐春鶯), seeking identity cards in advance, pursuing absentee voting or discussing allowing Chinese spouses to bring their relatives to Taiwan to use the nation’s healthcare system.
Yet neither of these opposition parties has brought up how marriage, a most basic human right, cannot be granted to same-sex Chinese spouses.
On multiple occasions, the TPP has proposed that its chairman, Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), fight for a constitutional interpretation if elected president, using this as an excuse to take credit for same-sex marriage policies and absolve the former Taipei mayor of his homophobic remarks.
Today, its best method for whitewashing is to immediately raise the issue of Taiwanese-Chinese same-sex marriage, but the TPP’s silence and inaction show how its members truly feel about minorities.
The KMT — the largest party in the legislature — should address the glaring omission of the DPP’s largest human rights failure. Questioning and doubting the ridiculousness of its stance on Taiwanese-Chinese same-sex marriage has the effect of highlighting the intentional neglect of marriage rights by Tsai and her administration. Yet, the KMT has also neglected to bring up the issue.
The KMT and TPP on the one hand roll out the welcome mat for heterosexual spouses, while on the other tightly slamming the door in the faces of same-sex Chinese spouses.
Apart from these two parties’ bills to loosen up the laws on Chinese spouses showing a superficial affinity for China, nobody has discussed how it builds a concealed homophobia within. For cross-strait same-sex couples, their wait for marriage includes even more dashed hopes and cruelty.
Kang Yunni works for a gender equality non-governmental organization.
Translated by Tim Smith
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS