Chinese social media influencer “Yaya in Taiwan” (亞亞在台灣), whose real name is Liu Zhenya (劉振亞), used her online accounts to openly advocate for “reunifying [China with] Taiwan through military force.”
As a result, the National Immigration Agency (NIA), citing risks of endangering national security and social stability, revoked her dependency-based residency permit under Article 14 of the Measures for the Permission of Family-based Residence, Long-term Residence and Settlement of People from the Mainland Area in the Taiwan Area (大陸地區人民在台灣地區依親居留長期居留或定居許可辦法).
Ironically, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is renowned for suppressing freedom of speech, has publicly supported this proponent of military unification under the pretence of “defending free speech.”
However, can advocating military unification be protected by freedom of speech? Consider this — if the CCP were to launch a military attack to forcibly invade Taiwan, Taiwanese would face immeasurable losses of life and property.
If advocating for unification with Taiwan through military force is considered exercising free speech, that would be equivalent to endorsing the CCP’s use of force to indiscriminately kill Taiwanese, treating Taiwanese lives as insignificant and viewing the nation’s soil as something to be trampled upon at will.
Such assertions are a significant threat to Taiwan.
Whether through peaceful unification, military unification or any other strategy, the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan would have the same outcome — the loss of Taiwan’s free speech as it exists today. Hong Kong serves as a vivid reminder of this.
Advocating for military unification is ultimately a call to dismantle Taiwan’s freedom of speech. Speech that seeks to destroy free speech has no right to be protected.
Taking a step back, if unifying with Taiwan through military force is as wonderful as Liu — who even nicknamed her daughter “Little Danggui” (小當歸), an affectionate nickname for Taiwanese children in China that is seen as symbolizing the idea of unification — claims, then she should be delighted about returning to the “motherland” now that the NIA has revoked her residency.
Returning to the motherland should be a joyous occasion, so why would Liu oppose the NIA’s decision?
Some prominent, pro-CCP pan-blue camp figures have even voiced sympathy and support for Liu — how odd.
Huang Wei-ping works in public service and has a graduate degree from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in the US.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Much has been said about the significance of the recall vote, but here is what must be said clearly and without euphemism: This vote is not just about legislative misconduct. It is about defending Taiwan’s sovereignty against a “united front” campaign that has crept into the heart of our legislature. Taiwanese voters on Jan. 13 last year made a complex decision. Many supported William Lai (賴清德) for president to keep Taiwan strong on the world stage. At the same time, some hoped that giving the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) a legislative majority would offer a
RSS