Within the past week, several Chinese spouses of Taiwanese have stirred up controversy by advocating on social media for China to invade Taiwan. However, that kind of language does not fall under freedom of speech and expression as defined in the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Under Article 20 of the covenant, war propaganda and encouragement of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence are prohibited. That is a major exception to the general protections and stipulations listed in the preceding article, which states that everyone has the right to hold opinions without interference.
In 1983, the 19th Session of the UN Human Rights Council passed the general comments to Article 11 to further clarify Article 20. The committee emphasized that Article 20 prohibits war propaganda that possibly or de facto leads to acts of aggression that destroys the advocacy of any peace as promoted in the UN Charter. However, the stipulation does not prohibit the right to self-defense or a person’s self-determination and advocacy for their independence, in line with the language of the charter.
Article 20 also does not specify whether the goal of such propaganda or advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred is targeted at a specific nation, either internally or externally.
Taiwan and China are not subservient to one another. The obvious split between a democratic Taiwan and an authoritarian China is an uncontestable reality, and is part of the international consensus. Advocating for the military annexation of Taiwan not only contravenes the covenants on freedom of speech and expression under the ICCPR, but also contravenes the “Purpose and Principles” section and other conventions of the UN Charter.
To uphold Taiwan’s national security and sovereignty, the government must unequivocally prohibit speech advocating for China’s “military unification of Taiwan.” Application of such laws should of course not be limited to Chinese spouses, but should also apply to Taiwanese, such as former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) central policy committee director Alex Tsai (蔡正元).
Chen Yi-nan is the convener of the science and technology committee of the Northern Taiwan Society, and an arbitrator and patent attorney.
Translated by Tim Smith
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
RSS