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As the passengers disembarked, health officials discovered that Taiwanese who should have been given priority had been replaced by the Chinese spouses of Taiwanese or their family members.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.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
RSS