The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Eastern Theater Command on Tuesday once again gathered its army, navy, air force and rocket force to conduct joint military exercises around Taiwan.
It also published a series of propaganda videos on Weibo, with one titled “Subdue Demons and Vanquish Evils,” which simulated missile attacks on Taiwan and featured scenes of Taipei 101.
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Zhu Fenglian (朱鳳蓮) said the exercises were resolute punishment for President William Lai’s (賴清德) administration’s “rampant ‘independence’ provocations.” It is undeniably clear that China is using military force to confront our country and advocate for the use of non-peaceful means to endanger Taiwan’s sovereignty.
Article 2 of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) defines the term “foreign hostile force” as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China,” and includes “countries, political entities or groups that advocate the use of non-peaceful means to endanger the sovereignty of the Republic of China.” Time and time again, China has resorted to using verbal and military intimidation against Taiwan.
Furthermore, Article 8 of China’s “Anti-Secession” Law specifically stipulates the use of “non-peaceful means” to prevent “Taiwan’s secession from China.” As such, there is absolutely no doubt that this clearly aligns with the definition of “foreign hostile force” defined under the Anti-Infiltration Act.
The term “foreign hostile force” is not only stipulated in the Anti-Infiltration Act — it is also outlined in Part 2, Chapter 2, Article 115-1 of the Criminal Code (中華民國刑法), which states that punishments for treason also apply to “offenses committed in Mainland China, Hong Kong, Macao, or any hostile foreign forces, or to the agents thereof.”
Articles 2 and 3 of the National Security Act (國家安全法) also stipulate that no individual may engage in certain acts on behalf of “a foreign country, Mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau, foreign hostile forces or various organizations, institutions, or groups established or substantially controlled by them or the persons dispatched by such organizations, institutions or groups.”
Taiwan’s legal framework consistently places China, Hong Kong, Macau and foreign hostile forces on the same regulatory level. Additionally, the language used in the penal provisions outlined in articles 32 to 34 of the Classified National Security Information Protection Act (國家機密保護法) also fall within this framework.
Within the legal system, placing China, Hong Kong, Macau on the same regulatory level as foreign hostile forces equates to categorizing them as foreign hostile forces. Therefore, Taiwan’s legal framework already designates China, Hong Kong and Macau as foreign hostile forces.
This is not a definition Lai set himself — it is the law of the land. The authority to change this definition lies only with China itself. Only when China acknowledges Taiwan as an independent, sovereign state, gives up using non-peaceful means against the nation and stops endangering our sovereignty would it no longer be considered a foreign hostile force. Otherwise, it would remain as such.
Li Chin-i is head prosecutor at the Taichung branch of the Taiwan High Prosecutors’ Office.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
In a stark reminder of China’s persistent territorial overreach, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh holding an Indian passport, was detained for 18 hours at Shanghai Pudong Airport on Nov. 24 last year. Chinese immigration officials allegedly informed her that her passport was “invalid” because she was “Chinese,” refusing to recognize her Indian citizenship and claiming Arunachal Pradesh as part of South Tibet. Officials had insisted that Thongdok, an Indian-origin UK resident traveling for a conference, was not Indian despite her valid documents. India lodged a strong diplomatic protest, summoning the Chinese charge d’affaires in Delhi and demanding
Immediately after the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) “Justice Mission” exercise at the end of last year, a question was posed to Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal regarding recent developments involving the exercises around Taiwan, and how he viewed their impact on regional peace and stability. His answer was somewhat perplexing to me as a curious student of Taiwanese affairs. “India closely follows developments across the Indo-Pacific region,” he said, adding: “We have an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region, in view of our significant trade, economic, people-to-people, and maritime interests. We urge all concerned
In the past 72 hours, US Senators Roger Wicker, Dan Sullivan and Ruben Gallego took to social media to publicly rebuke the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) over the defense budget. I understand that Taiwan’s head is on the chopping block, and the urgency of its security situation cannot be overstated. However, the comments from Wicker, Sullivan and Gallego suggest they have fallen victim to a sophisticated disinformation campaign orchestrated by an administration in Taipei that treats national security as a partisan weapon. The narrative fed to our allies claims the opposition is slashing the defense budget to kowtow to the Chinese
In a Taipei Times editorial published almost three years ago (“Macron goes off-piste,” April 13, 2023, page 8), French President Emmanuel Macron was criticized for comments he made immediately after meeting Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing. Macron had spoken of the need for his country to find a path on Chinese foreign policy no longer aligned with that of the US, saying that continuing to follow the US agenda would sacrifice the EU’s strategic autonomy. At the time, Macron was criticized for gifting Xi a PR coup, and the editorial said that he had been “persuaded to run