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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS