Taiwan has begun screening civil servants and military personnel for People’s Republic of China (PRC) residency permits or IDs. Only 77 people have been found with such documents so far, but what if that number grows as the vetting continues? Should the state fire them all and revoke their citizenship, or is there a smarter, more sustainable path forward — one grounded in law, education and clarity?
A government cannot function if its employees are legally or emotionally tied to a regime bent on absorbing it. In Taiwan, national security is not paranoia, it is a necessity grounded in lived experience. China’s “united front” operations, cyberattacks and cognitive warfare campaigns are not just speculation; they are as real and pervasive as the air we breathe.
However, clarity is as essential as vigilance. Many Taiwanese remain unsure about the legal and political implications of obtaining Chinese documents. A Chinese residency permit is often seen as a matter of convenience, useful for doing business, visiting family or traveling. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) sells it that way: a benign offering from the “motherland,” framed as a birthright. Against that narrative, many Taiwanese do not see such documents as a big deal, not because they are disloyal, but because they are uninformed.
Obtaining PRC household registration or a national ID automatically results in the loss of Taiwanese citizenship. For civil servants and military personnel, penalties include immediate dismissal, disqualification from public service and forfeiture of pension benefits. Even holding a Chinese residence permit — once a legal gray area — has been used as grounds for revoking citizenship, especially for those in sensitive roles.
Beyond legality, there is a deeper psychological risk. By granting Taiwanese certain conveniences and privileges — while they continue to enjoy the freedoms, benefits and protections of life in Taiwan — the CCP creates a powerful illusion that unification is harmless, even desirable. Some Taiwanese begin to believe that “one country, two systems” is already functioning, and that life under Chinese rule might not be so different.
They are receiving a curated experience, designed to seduce and confuse. Life under the CCP is tightly controlled, constantly monitored and politically repressive. If the party took over Taiwan, regardless of the promised “format” of rule, the reality would be just as bad, if not worse.
Taiwanese need not look further than Hong Kong to see that the illusion has been shattered. In 2017, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs declared the Sino-British Joint Declaration a “historical document that no longer has any realistic meaning.” That statement did not just betray Hong Kong; it laid bare Beijing’s attitude toward international agreements. If this is how China treats a formal treaty, what weight would any promise to Taiwan carry?
Laws that are not clearly communicated cannot deter. To truly protect national integrity and the civil service, Taiwan must make the consequences of acquiring PRC documents unmistakably clear. Public information campaigns, mandatory institutional briefings and school-based civic education should all play a role. Civil servants must not only know the law, they must understand the reasoning behind it.
Enforcement should be principled, not just punitive. A one-time grace period, perhaps six to 12 months, should be offered to people who hold Chinese IDs or residency permits. Those who relinquish them and provide proof of it should not face legal consequences. After that, the law must be enforced with consistency.
Such an approach strikes a balance. It affirms that dual allegiance is incompatible with public service, while recognizing that some people might have acquired PRC documents under different circumstances or with limited understanding of the risks. It is more just and more effective to correct than to condemn.
Screening should also be proportionate. Self-declaration for the public sector is reasonable, but there should be deeper vetting for on those in sensitive roles. There is no need to create a climate of suspicion among schoolteachers or city clerks. The process must feel fair, not ideological.
Ultimately, true national security is not built on surveillance alone. It is bolstered by education, civic pride and trust in democratic institutions. If we want future generations to resist authoritarian seduction, they must be equipped with more than rules; they must be grounded in reason.
The threat is real, and so must our response be, but fear alone would not preserve our freedoms. Clarity, consistency and civic understanding is the smarter path forward.
John Cheng is a retired businessman from Hong Kong currently residing in Taiwan.
Denmark has consistently defended Greenland in light of US President Donald Trump’s interests and has provided unwavering support to Ukraine during its war with Russia. Denmark can be proud of its clear support for peoples’ democratic right to determine their own future. However, this democratic ideal completely falls apart when it comes to Taiwan — and it raises important questions about Denmark’s commitment to supporting democracies. Taiwan lives under daily military threats from China, which seeks to take over Taiwan, by force if necessary — an annexation that only a very small minority in Taiwan supports. Denmark has given China a
Speaking at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit on May 13, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that democracies must remain united and that “Taiwan’s security is essential to regional stability and to defending democratic values amid mounting authoritarianism.” Earlier that day, Tsai had met with a group of Danish parliamentarians led by Danish Parliament Speaker Pia Kjaersgaard, who has visited Taiwan many times, most recently in November last year, when she met with President William Lai (賴清德) at the Presidential Office. Kjaersgaard had told Lai: “I can assure you that ... you can count on us. You can count on our support
Many local news media over the past week have reported on Internet personality Holger Chen’s (陳之漢) first visit to China between Tuesday last week and yesterday, as remarks he made during a live stream have sparked wide discussions and strong criticism across the Taiwan Strait. Chen, better known as Kuan Chang (館長), is a former gang member turned fitness celebrity and businessman. He is known for his live streams, which are full of foul-mouthed and hypermasculine commentary. He had previously spoken out against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and criticized Taiwanese who “enjoy the freedom in Taiwan, but want China’s money”
Last month, two major diplomatic events unfolded in Southeast Asia that suggested subtle shifts in the region’s strategic landscape. The 46th ASEAN Summit and the inaugural ASEAN-Gulf-Cooperation Council (GCC)-China Trilateral Summit in Kuala Lumpur coincided with French President Emmanuel Macron’s high-profile visits to Vietnam, Indonesia and Singapore. Together, they highlighted ASEAN’s maturing global posture, deepening regional integration and China’s intensifying efforts to recalibrate its economic diplomacy amid uncertainties posed by the US. The ASEAN summit took place amid rising protectionist policies from the US, notably sweeping tariffs on goods from Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam, with duties as high as 49 percent.
RSS