Imagine that the Taiwanese government for some reason forcibly sent back a few hundred Japanese or US passengers -- all who held legal visas to come here -- as they prepared to land at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport. It would be a major human rights violation against foreigners in Taiwan. Imagine the lengthy media reports of these passengers' anger, the level of criticism that would be leveled against government officials at every level and the charges of dereliction of duty.
But that's a different story. Instead, a group of Taiwanese on their way to the Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China, were going to arrive close to the same time that the Chinese leader Hu Jintao (
The ceremonies praised the success of the "one country, two systems" model. Only a few Taiwanese media reported on these Taiwanese being turned back ? the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times' sister paper), Formosa TV, Chinese Television System, TVBS and the China Times.
These exceptions aside, the vast majority of media outlets were either blind to the event or gave only the briefest sketch of what happened. This begs the question: How much of our media is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party? And why are they only reporting on the celebrations and Hong Kong's glorious scenery?
It is true that the majority of the victims were Falun Gong students. But if Falun Gong students' legal and human rights can be violated, who knows what other Taiwanese person can be persecuted?
We all know that Falun Gong practioners are not the only ones to be oppressed by the Chinese Communist Party over the years. A short list would include Taiwanese businessmen, religious figures, democracy activists, people who belong to "objectionable" associations, the Uygur people, journalists and the countless Chinese cheated by corrupt public figures. One by one, each of these groups has suffered at the hands of the CCP.
Their goals are justice and a government that respects liberties and the rule of law. They want an end to collusion with and control over the media that prevents expositions on the injustice occurring throughout China. They only hope to see everyone respected and an end to cruel behavior.
However, the Chinese media can do nothing under the control of the system. Only a few respected journalists are still struggling to end censorship and expose corruption and privilege. Unfortunately, these people, just like other human rights activists, are often forced to resign, held in detention, and see their organizations closed down. For most of the media, they can merely play the role of a mouthpiece willingly or unwillingly under various regulations, in order to present the false appearance of peace and prosperity.
Isn't Taiwan a free society? Shouldn't its free media uncover all faults so as to protect people's rights?
Many friends in the media told me that their supervisors ordered them not to report anything about Falun Gong and its logo should never appear on TV because Chinese leaders do not like it. As a result, many Taiwanese media no longer report about it.
Behind the self-censorship, I believe that no journalist likes his or her freedoms curtailed. So what causes it? Lures or threats?
Various business and private exchanges between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are close.
The Taiwanese media certainly has the responsibility to protect people's right to know, as well as to supervise cross-strait human rights conditions. Hence, the amount of reporting local media do on cross-strait human right issues is a key index of freedom.
Flora Chang is a professor at National Taiwan University's Graduate Institute of Journalism.
TRANSLATED BY JASON COX AND EDDY CHANG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion