Hong Kong writer and critic Leung Man-tao (梁文道) last week published an article on the Hong Kong-based Stand News Web site, entitled “S.F. Express operates one country, two systems.”
Leung described how, after purchasing some books during a trip to Taiwan, he asked his hotel to help him send them to Hong Kong by courier.
However, upon returning home, Leung received an e-mail from the hotel informing him that “due to recent controls imposed by the Chinese authorities on the contents of articles and books, three of your books could not be delivered by the courier.”
The books were Out of China: How the Chinese Ended the Era of Western Domination by Robert Bickers, The Great Debate by Yuval Levin and one of the Intellectual History series by various authors.
The incident made Leung question whether China’s “one country, two systems” model has already taken hold in Taiwan.
This is what used to happen during the Martial Law era, when disputes arose over the prohibition of books by state censors. For the same to happen in today’s democratic Taiwan would require large-scale manipulation and control. There are several questions about this episode that require answers.
First, was it the Taiwanese subsidiary of China-based S.F. Express Co or some other party that took upon itself to act as the White Terror-era Taiwan Garrison Command and prohibit the books from being shipped to Hong Kong?
As the criteria used by the courier exactly matched the rules stipulated by the Chinese government, the incident amounts to the infiltration and surveillance of a commercial courier company’s operational systems on Taiwanese soil, and more than just an exercise in “thought control.”
This begs the question: Who is pulling the strings behind the scenes and how do they wield so much power that they were able to breach a private individual’s privacy and property rights?
In addition to throwing up a legal debate on whether there has been an infringement of consumers’ rights, this unthinkable incident also raises questions regarding freedom of the press, as it involves the shipping of books across borders.
Who exactly has taken it upon themselves to check which books can be shipped from Taiwan to Hong Kong?
Remember the handover of Hong Kong from the UK to China in 1997. The promise made by Beijing at the time that Hong Kong would enjoy 50 years without changes has without a doubt been broken, as people today see the editorial freedom of Hong Kong’s press compromised and booksellers kidnapped and taken to China to face trial — just two examples among a plethora of similar incidents.
In addition to the “one country, two systems” model having morphed into an authoritarian system, just as concerning is the Chinese speculative investment that has poured into Hong Kong — where it pushes up land and property prices — as well as the tsunami of spending by Chinese consumers that are creating a bubble economy. Today’s Hong Kong has lost its original vitality and been stripped of its soul.
The question is whether similar techniques are being used in some places in Taiwan and whether the public will be able to see through the inestimable losses that will come from allowing China to infiltrate Taiwan’s economy.
The economic bubble in Taiwan continues to be inflated by Chinese investment. One day — perhaps too late — people will awaken from their slumber and realize that Taiwan has been sleepwalking into “one country, two systems” authoritarianism, from which it will be extremely difficult to extricate itself.
The Leung incident demonstrates that “one country, two systems” is gradually morphing into “unification under one system.”
Fellow Taiwanese — especially book lovers — should carefully read Leung’s article and devour every word so as to fully understand the veracity of the watchword “Today Hong Kong, tomorrow Taiwan” — and that this nightmare vision is fast becoming a reality.
The “Communist bandits” really are knocking at the door.
Writing and books are the most foundational medium and most frequently used method for the transfer of information and ideas. Despite Taiwan’s democratization, today there is once again a malevolent force manipulating and censoring information behind the scenes.
The government should treat this incident with the seriousness it warrants and use all the means at its disposal to investigate and provide a clear explanation to both the Taiwanese public and the people of Hong Kong. In a democracy, people should expect nothing less.
Chang Hsun-ching is a writer.
Translated by Edward Jones
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
RSS