Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chen Ming-tong (陳明通) on Thursday said that the government had received asylum applications from at least 200 Hong Kongers as Beijing seeks to ram through a national security bill for the territory.
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has said that there is no need to introduce refugee legislation to offer Hong Kongers asylum, while Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) has said the Act Governing Relations With Hong Kong and Macau (香港澳門關係條例) does not need to be amended to deal with such requests.
However, refugee bills sponsored by Democratic Progressive Party lawmakers have languished for 15 years, while the Hong Kong and Macau law lacks regulations regarding asylum.
Article 18 of the act, which officials have cited as the legal basis for offering Hong Kongers asylum, only states that the council may provide Hong Kong residents whose safety and freedom have been threatened due to political reasons with assistance if necessary, without specifying the conditions that applicants must meet.
This could lead to problems when the council and the National Immigration Agency review an applicant’s background. For example, could asylum be granted to an applicant with a criminal record, or must they have no criminal record going back 12 months from the date of application?
If the latter were the case, it would defeat the purpose of offering asylum for political reasons, as they could have been charged as dissidents by the Hong Kong government.
The political leanings of asylum seekers should also be reviewed to sift out those who have engaged in rhetoric or actions in support of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This might sound politically incorrect, but with the government grappling with national and social security threats posed by groups that promote unification, the last thing Taiwan needs is more CCP supporters who could erode national security.
Given that wealthy Hong Kongers are more likely to have close ties with the Chinese government, making them less likely to seek asylum, Taipei should consider whether the investment threshold of NT$6 million (US$200,321) to qualify for residency could shut out Hong Kongers who need it the most.
Taiwan and Hong Kong face a similar challenge, as they are both at risk of being controlled by the CCP. Only by accepting allies who champion democratic values will Taiwan remain a haven for Hong Kongers who are brave enough to stand up against the despotism of the CCP.
The government has shied away from enacting refugee legislation, as Beijing might interpret it as a step toward statehood. This discreteness has prompted Tsai’s administration to refrain from pushing legislation to remove the phrase “unification of the nation” from the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) or change how the Constitution defines the nation’s territory.
However, at issue is humanitarian assistance, which transcends politics. Making a stand for human rights would win Taiwan international praise and further consolidate its status as a beacon of democracy. Beijing would be hard pressed to justify any brash response to Taipei passing a refugee law.
With US President Donald Trump’s administration adopting a confrontational China policy, Taiwan should seek Washington’s support to introduce refugee legislation to break from the restrictions imposed by Beijing to limit Taiwan’s self-determination.
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The National Immigration Agency on Tuesday said it had notified some naturalized citizens from China that they still had to renounce their People’s Republic of China (PRC) citizenship. They must provide proof that they have canceled their household registration in China within three months of the receipt of the notice. If they do not, the agency said it would cancel their household registration in Taiwan. Chinese are required to give up their PRC citizenship and household registration to become Republic of China (ROC) nationals, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chiu Chui-cheng (邱垂正) said. He was referring to Article 9-1 of the Act
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
RSS