In an alarming escalation of diplomatic coercion, the Chinese government has imposed sanctions on Hei Seki, a naturalized Japanese citizen, member of the Japanese House of Councilors and an outspoken critic of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
The sanctions include an assets freeze, a ban on transactions with Chinese entities, and a prohibition on entry into China, Hong Kong and Macau for Seki and his immediate family.
Beijing accuses him of “spreading fallacies” about Taiwan, Tibet, Xinjiang and the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) — called the Senkaku Islands in Japan — issues that, while sensitive to China, fall squarely within the realm of legitimate political discourse in Japan.
This move is not merely a diplomatic rebuke — it is a direct affront to Japan’s sovereignty and democratic norms. By targeting a sitting Japanese lawmaker for his views, China has crossed a line from bilateral disagreement into extraterritorial censorship. It is an attempt to export its authoritarian intolerance of dissent into the heart of Japan’s parliamentary system.
DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS
Seki’s political positions — whether one agrees with them or not — are protected under Japan’s constitutional guarantees of free speech and democratic representation.
His critiques of Beijing’s policies on Taiwan and Tibet reflect not only personal conviction, but also a broader concern shared by many in Japan and across the democratic world: that China’s expanding influence is increasingly backed by punitive measures designed to silence critics abroad.
Seki himself has called the sanctions a “farce,” saying he has no assets in China or any plans to visit the country.
The sanctions are also deeply ironic. China accuses Seki of interfering in its internal affairs, yet it is Beijing that now seeks to interfere in Japan’s domestic politics by punishing a lawmaker for exercising his mandate.
This inversion of sovereignty — where a foreign power seeks to dictate the boundaries of acceptable speech within another nation’s legislature — should alarm every democracy.
DIASPORIC VOICES
The targeting of Seki, a China-born Japanese citizen, carries troubling implications for diasporic voices. It sends a chilling message to ethnic Chinese who have chosen democratic societies: Their political views might still be policed by Beijing, regardless of their citizenship or allegiance. This is not only a sanction, but is also a warning shot aimed at transnational dissent.
Japan must respond not with retaliation, but with resolve. The integrity of its democratic institutions depends on its ability to protect elected officials from foreign intimidation.
Supporting Hei Seki is not about endorsing every word he has spoken — it is about defending the principle that lawmakers in a free society must be free to speak.
ALLIED UNITY
In the face of authoritarian overreach, silence is complicity. Japan’s allies, especially those in the Indo-Pacific region, should recognize this moment for what it is: A test of democratic resilience.
Seki might have no assets in China and no intention of visiting the nation, but the principle at stake is priceless. It is the right of a sovereign nation to govern itself, speak freely and resist the creeping shadow of censorship from abroad.
We must all stand together to support Seki — not just for his sake, but for the sake of every democracy that refuses to be dictated to.
Khedroob Thondup is a former member of the Tibetan parliament-in-exile.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The
RSS