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As the passengers disembarked, health officials discovered that Taiwanese who should have been given priority had been replaced by the Chinese spouses of Taiwanese or their family members.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.
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS