I expected my article (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) published in the Taipei Times, to create a stir and wrote it to spark a debate over how Taiwan should respond to the affront on its sovereignty. Marcel Oppliger’s well-crafted riposte (“Yeoh is welcome back any time,” March 29, page 8) articulates several good arguments against my position — that the actress should be banned for coming to Taiwan to engage in pro-China propaganda undermining Taiwanese sovereignty — but ultimately fails to build a convincing argument for why Taiwan should tolerate such behavior without severe repercussions.
Oppliger wrote that media reports indicate Yeoh referred to Taiwan as a country in remarks at the Tiffany & Co party at Taipei 101 prior to her loathsome social media post. However, that only shows that Yeoh acted quite consciously in a premeditated way to join China’s cognitive warfare and propaganda against Taiwan. That was not a flippant post erring on the side of economic caution, rather it was a calculated act to appease Beijing.
Oppliger’s piece suggests that Taiwan asserting control of its own borders would “risk making Taiwan look petty and resentful,” but there is nothing petty about denying entry to foreign propagandists engaged in cognitive warfare against the country. Sovereign states have the right to determine who is eligible for entry, and national security considerations are neither petty nor resentful.
The claim that Beijing would love to promote the headline “Michelle Yeoh banned from Taiwan” could not be further from the truth. Beijing loathes mention of any implication that Taiwan might have control over its own borders as a sovereign state. In fact, such a headline would not even be published by any Chinese media, which are only allowed to refer to Taiwan as “China’s Taiwan.” Beijing would certainly struggle to explain the implications of such a headline, as it would imply China had a role in the decision.
Rather, China would seek to downplay the story, which demonstrates precisely the importance of such an act. It would seize global headlines, demonstrating plainly and clearly for the world that Taiwan is a sovereign state with control of its own borders.
Equating that ban with China’s notorious human rights record is not just laughable, but bordering on offensive. Countries such as Australia and Canada regularly ban public figures from entering based on public comments, yet no one questions whether those states are democracies that generally respect human rights. By contrast, China is an authoritarian state that has been credibly accused and found guilty of genocide, with no pretensions to democracy.
I admire Oppliger’s call for Taiwan to instead invite Yeoh to return for a publicity tour highlighting the nation’s democracy and diverse freedoms. However, we all know she would not accept such an invitation. Those actors and public figures know what they are doing when they deny Taiwan’s very existence and support Chinese propaganda. It is high time they started paying the consequences for their actions.
Sasha B. Chhabra is a visiting fellow at the Institute for National Defense and Security Research in Taipei.
Many foreigners, particularly Germans, are struck by the efficiency of Taiwan’s administration in routine matters. Driver’s licenses, household registrations and similar procedures are handled swiftly, often decided on the spot, and occasionally even accompanied by preferential treatment. However, this efficiency does not extend to all areas of government. Any foreigner with long-term residency in Taiwan — just like any Taiwanese — would have encountered the opposite: agencies, most notably the police, refusing to accept complaints and sending applicants away at the counter without consideration. This kind of behavior, although less common in other agencies, still occurs far too often. Two cases
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
RSS