I ran into World Uyghur Congress president Rebiya Kadeer by the elevator on my way to attend a hearing on July 19 of the US Congressional Executive Commission on China on conditions in Xinjiang a year after the riots in July last year. We exchanged a few words, and I could sense her warmth and kindness.
She was accompanied by the vice president of the World Uyghur Congress, Omer Kanat, a kind and friendly gentleman who has spent his life working for freedom and human rights for people in East Turkestan or the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region.
These two people live and work in Washington and are considered by the US government and Congress to be respected and reliable sources of information on what is happening in their homeland.
Last year, however, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration blocked Kadeer from visiting Taiwan to promote her movie The Ten Conditions of Love and only last week stalled Kanat’s visa application for so long that he was also unable to visit Taiwan.
Whose side is the Ma administration on? Does it want to promote human rights and democracy around the world — and support freedom-loving people like Kadeer and Kanat — or does it side with the repressive government in Beijing, which is increasingly seen in the international community as a perpetrator of injustice, especially in Tibet and Xinjiang?
While I was listening to the panelists’ comments about Xinjiang, I could not help but compare events in Xinjiang and Taiwan. Conditions in Xinjiang have been worsening, as the Chinese government classifies Uighurs as terrorists, stripping them of their freedom and basic rights. Do the events in Xinjiang perhaps give us some indication as to Taiwan’s future if it continues on its present course?
The Ma administration seems intent on drawing Taiwan closer to China, and in doing so has increasingly behaved in an undemocratic way in Taiwan. Ma’s agenda seems to be more concerned with pleasing the Chinese government than adhering to the basic principles of human rights and democracy.
During the question-and-answer session at the congressional hearing, Shirley Kan of the US Congressional Research Service expressed concern about these trends in Taiwan. In particular, she criticized the decision by the Ma government to block Kadeer from coming to Taiwan, saying the Taiwanese government was “at odds” with US and Japanese policies on these issues.
If the Ma government wants to be considered part of the democratic world, it needs to show more clearly and openly that it upholds human rights and democracy. Statements about “shared values” with the US are not enough.
Indeed, the Ma administration has all too often given the impression that it has “shared values” with the People’s Republic of China. Its emphasis on being “Chinese” creates the misconception that there is a common heritage — which is only true for those who came over from China with Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) after the civil war.
The reality is that Taiwanese have their own identity, a rich and multicultural heritage based on Aboriginal origins, Hoklo and Hakka influences, and half a century under Japanese rule. Based on this heritage, we need to distinguish ourselves as a freedom-loving nation that is accepted by the international community, instead of cozying up to an undemocratic China.
The people of East Turkestan regrettably do not have that choice anymore; the people of Taiwan do and must exercise the right to self-determination denied their Uighur cousins..
Susan Wang is an undergraduate student in international development Studies at McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
RSS