Taiwan on Monday celebrated Freedom of Speech Day. The commemoration is not an international day, and was first established in Tainan by President William Lai (賴清德) in 2012, when he was mayor of that city. The day was elevated to a national holiday in 2016 by then-president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文).
Lai chose April 7, because it marks the anniversary of the death of democracy advocate Deng Nan-jung (鄭南榕), who started Freedom Era Weekly to promote freedom of expression.
Thirty-six years ago, a warrant for Deng’s arrest had been issued after he refused to appear in court to answer charges of insurrection for publishing a proposal for a constitution to replace the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution written in China. He self-immolated in his office while police coming to take him into custody banged on his door.
Deng lived in a very different time. Lai last month officially identified the People’s Republic of China as a “foreign hostile force.” In 1989, the year of his death, Deng was grappling with a different kind of foreign hostile force: He was seeking more freedoms in Taiwan under the foreign regime of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) that had taken control of Taiwan and imposed martial law in 1949.
Martial law had been lifted two years previously by then-president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), but the regime’s paranoia remained, hence the insurrection charge for calling for a replacement to the ROC Constitution. Taiwanese-born Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) became leader of the KMT and president after Chiang’s death in 1988, but direct presidential elections would not come until 1996 after pressure from the 1990 Wild Lily student movement. Lee would later become known as the “father of Taiwanese democracy,” but neither the movement nor the democratization that it led to would have been known to Deng. He had still been fighting in the dark, and yet could be called a trailblazer for the nation’s eventual democratization.
Were Deng still alive today, he would have witnessed quite a remarkable transformation. Taiwan has a vibrant and competitive democratic system, and is considered “free,” scoring an impressive 94 out of a possible 100 points in the Freedom in the World 2025 report by Freedom House. By comparison, the US scored 84, and China 9.
In the scoring system, a country is awarded 0 to 4 points for each of 10 political rights indicators and 15 civil liberties indicators.
Taiwan scored the maximum 4 points for free and fair elections of national government and legislative representatives; an independent judiciary; openness and transparency in government; due process in civil and criminal matters; the right to organize political parties; individual freedoms to express personal views on political subjects without fear of surveillance or retribution; and the existence of free and independent media.
One of the few metrics in which the nation dropped a point is whether people’s political choices are free from domination by “forces that are external to the political sphere, or by political forces that employ extrapolitical means.” The report points the finger for this directly at China.
Ironically, with freedom of speech comes the necessity to set judiciously defined bounds when the exercise of that freedom puts the existence of the nation at risk.
In a speech delivered to mark Freedom of Speech Day on Monday, Lai defined those bounds, saying that the government would act against anyone who echoes Chinese propaganda aimed at inciting an invasion of Taiwan or the subversion of the government.
Deng advocated pure freedom of speech to resist the foreign regime governing the nation. Now, Taiwan needs to set boundaries to resist the enemy from within assisting the enemy beyond its borders.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective
RSS