While many other nations have evacuated their citizens from China’s Hubei Province, the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak, hundreds of Taiwanese, many of them members of the expatriate business community, remain trapped inside the quarantine zone.
Those who wish to return to Taiwan have become frustrated that the government has not organized additional charter flights to bring them home.
Reports began to surface on Monday that stranded Taiwanese have formed a “self-help group” and have hired a lawyer to assist in bringing a suit against the government for allegedly violating their constitutional rights.
While every sympathy goes out to any Taiwanese who have had to endure more than a month of isolation in what must be incredibly trying circumstances, they are venting their spleens at the wrong government.
The administration of President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) last month chartered an evacuation flight from Wuhan. However, after the flight touched down in Taiwan on Feb. 3, it quickly became apparent that the passenger list, previously agreed by the Chinese government and the Mainland Affairs Council, contained serious anomalies.
The council had asked China to prioritize vulnerable Taiwanese: those on short trips who lacked resources for a long stay, as well as children, the elderly and anyone suffering from chronic diseases, who would be at a higher risk of infection.
As the passengers disembarked, health officials discovered that Taiwanese who should have been given priority had been replaced by the Chinese spouses of Taiwanese or their family members. Three of the passengers were not even on the original list, one of whom was confirmed to have COVID-19 on arrival.
Given the bungling of that flight, it is understandable that the government is wary of agreeing to a second.
Taiwan has, to date, defied expectations by limiting the spread of the coronavirus and preventing community outbreaks. This is in no small part due to the prudence and circumspection of health officials — in particular, their willingness to take difficult and often unpopular decisions to protect the health of the wider public.
Of course, the government has a duty to look after its citizens in need of assistance wherever they are in the world, but the rights of those requesting repatriation must always be balanced against the duty to protect the safety of Taiwanese at home.
The primary reason for the botched flight — and the delay in organizing further flights — is Beijing’s decision to sever direct communication channels with the government following Tsai winning the presidency in 2016. As a result, the organization of evacuation flights had to be carried out at arm’s length through the council.
The Tsai administration has not ruled out arranging another charter flight. Discussions are ongoing with China and the government has said that it is ready to organize a flight if specific criteria are met.
After the self-help group announced its intention to sue the government, Taiwanese lawyer Huang Di-ying (黃帝穎) posted an angry missive on Facebook.
“It was the Chinese government who suppressed evidence of the virus and muzzled whistle-blower doctor Li Wenliang (李文亮), the Chinese government who quarantined entire cities and Chinese officials who placed an infected person onto the evacuation flight,” he wrote. “They have not a single word of criticism for Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), yet they want to sue our government... They are colluding with Beijing to make mischief.”
It is unclear whether the lawsuit is a political act or motivated out of genuine frustration, but we should be clear which side is preventing further evacuation of Taiwanese.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s