Beijing has detained Ching Cheong (
Many people who hold unrealistic ideas about China often conveniently forget, or consciously choose to turn a blind eye, to its notorious violations of basic civil rights -- freedom of the press being just one of them. It should not be forgotten that in China the news media is state-controlled and is essentially a puppet, allowed to parrot government propaganda only.
Beijing's long record of arresting journalists who step out of line speaks for itself. Chinese journalists have been arrested for reporting the government cover-up of the SARS epidemic and the spread of AIDS, as well as scandals involving corrupt officials and police brutality, among others. In any democratic society, reporters who bravely stand up against the system are considered heros. In China, they get thrown in jail. It is no wonder that the advocacy group Reporters Without Borders says there are more journalists in prison in China than anywhere else in the world.
As for foreign journalists based abroad or in special administrative regions of China such as Hong Kong, or who work for a foreign media outlet, Beijing does show a little more deference -- just a little -- due entirely to concerns over international pressure. Still, it is not enough to keep incidents such as the detention of Ching from occurring.
In fact, Ching's case marks the second incident of detention by the Chinese government of people working for foreign media within the past year. Zhao Yan (
Of course, no one is arguing that journalists should be granted legal immunity per se just because they are reporters. But Beijing, as a matter of standard procedure, often arrests or detains journalists without charge. Even when it bothers to make an official charge, it is often dubious -- like stealing "state secrets" or engaging in "espionage activities." As for what constitutes "state secrets" or "espionage activities," the Chinese government retains the subjective and arbitrary discretion to define them. The definitions vary depending on the political needs and concerns of the government at the time.
Ching was allegedly detained to prevent the publication of secret interviews with Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽), the former premier who opposed the 1989 Tiananmen massacre. Reportedly, Beijing feared that the publication of the manuscript might stir memories of the massacre and create resentment toward the government. But everyone already knows that the bloody crackdown was ordered by the Chinese government. What kind of "state secret" is that?
There is also the severe lack of legal due process for journalists who are detained or arrested. They are often placed in detention for a long period of time without charges being formally made, without the right to legal representation, and without any formal and open trial.
Ching has been in custody since the end of April, allegedly to assist the "investigation." The same is true in Zhao Yan's case.
If Beijing genuinely wishes to change the impression that it has absolutely no respect for the rule of law and human rights, start by according these detained journalists open and transparent legal due process.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS