The devastating fire at the Wang Fuk Court housing complex in Tai Po, Hong Kong, resulted in at least 159 deaths, with dozens still missing. The several subtle incidents that followed the tragedy revealed the top priority of the Hong Kong Government and the authorities in Beijing in responding to the disaster — maintaining the stability of the regime. The rights and interests of Hong Kong residents have been all but sidelined.
For Taiwanese, who are accustomed to democracy and freedom, this should serve as an urgent warning — especially now that some have even proposed the insidious notion of “one country, two regions.”
After the disaster, students in Hong Kong attempted to launch an online petition that outlined their demands: continued support and proper resettlement for residents impacted by the fire, the establishment of an independent investigative committee to probe possible corruption and full government accountability.
For Taiwanese, such demands are completely justified, typical of everyday democratic practice, but that is not the case in Hong Kong.
The person responsible for initiating the petition, 24-year-old Miles Kwan (關靖豐), was immediately arrested by Hong Kong’s national security police on suspicion of “sedition.” A former legislator who shared the online petition was also arrested, accused of “stirring hatred.”
Expressing demands in response to major social events is a right protected in Taiwan, but in Hong Kong, it has become a criminal act that puts one in danger of arrest and prosecution.
Do Taiwanese truly want to be ruled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and live such a life? If the CCP were to govern Taiwan or a “one country, two regions” framework was actually adopted, simply expressing opinions, or raising demands after major disasters or regarding large-scale energy projects could result in an arrest.
Would Taiwanese ever get used to that?
The Wang Fuk Court fire is littered with suspicious circumstances. Before even determining the cause of the incident, the Hong Kong government has moved against the public, charging people with “stirring chaos,” and accusing “anti-China forces” of “inciting social division” and “stirring hatred against authorities.”
Even a public news conference on high-rise building maintenance policies was canceled, and its organizers were forcibly summoned for questioning.
Do Taiwanese truly want to live under a “one country, two regions” system, enduring a life where they are banned from even holding a simple news conference?
By the Hong Kong government’s standards, Taiwanese could be arrested and imprisoned for such actions.
Under those circumstances, how could there be any meaningful government oversight or protection of public rights and interests?
What use would your grievances be when there is nowhere to seek justice?
One of the most precious aspects of Taiwanese society is that people have the right to speak freely about major issues as well as national small social matters. They have the right to rigorously scrutinize the government through assembly and association. Meanwhile, it has already been proven that under Chinese rule, Hong Kongers have no right to discuss public safety.
With the facts before us, would you still accept the deadly “one country, two systems” arrangement?
Chen Kuan-lin is a research manager from Taipei.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS