It speaks volumes about what is considered normal in Taiwan that a retired general — Kao An-kuo (高安國) in this case — could call on military officers not only to surrender to China, but also to overthrow the nation’s democratically elected government, and Taiwanese could throw up their hands and say: “We’ve heard this all before.”
Kao regularly posts low-budget YouTube videos in which he is sitting behind a microphone in his military fatigues criticizing the government and spreading disinformation, for example, on alleged deaths after COVID-19 vaccinations and that the government was sacrificing Taiwanese lives by rejecting Beijing’s offers of Chinese vaccines.
Kao’s call on the military to surrender was posted to YouTube on June 7, and it appears to have gone largely under the radar, only drawing comment in the past few weeks, with Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Lai Jui-lung (賴瑞隆) saying that the retired general’s words amount to treason and contravene the National Security Act (國家安全法).
The criteria for treason — if Taiwan were a normal country — seem to be met by Kao’s statement, even if it is difficult to take seriously a lone man in his fatigues spouting extremist antipathy in a poorly lit makeshift studio.
However, it is far from clear whether prosecution for treason is viable based on current legislation, not least because it refers to China as “the mainland area” and does not consider it a foreign country.
Kao seems to be acting as Beijing’s agent, but the Anti-infiltration Act (反滲透法) only concerns activity on foreign soil or activity in Taiwan to influence elections on behalf of a foreign government.
Article 107 of the Criminal Code lists “inciting a person in the armed services to neglect his duty, desert, mutiny, or commit a breach of discipline” as a crime punishable by death or life imprisonment, but only under the condition that the nation is at war or war is imminent.
Lawyer Huang Di-ying (黃帝穎) has said that articles 153 and 155 of the code would be applicable to Kao’s case. The former concerns inciting another person to commit an offense, for which the accused would be liable to a sentence of “not more than two years, short-term imprisonment or a fine of not more than thirty thousand [New Taiwan] dollars”; the latter concerns somebody “who incites a person in the armed services to fail to execute his duty, commit a breach of discipline, desert, or mutiny,” and carries a jail sentence of six months to five years. These punishments are quite lenient for treason.
Kao seems harmless in his videos with low production values, but he is also involved with other groups, such as the Blue Sky Action Alliance, which enjoys the support of China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) founder Chang An-le (張安樂), a former gang leader with more influence and a bigger organization behind him than Kao.
During a political forum in Shanghai last month called “Chinese Compatriots Across the Strait: Joining Hands to Realize the Chinese Dream,” Chang also said that he would call on military commanders to surrender on the day China annexes Taiwan by force, although it is legitimate to ask why he thinks they might listen to him.
The alliance, the CUPP and another pro-unification group, the Concentric Patriotism Association, are regularly suspected of being behind public disturbances. The groups’ funding can allegedly be traced back to China.
Cases involving individuals like Kao, with their limited influence and funds, might not seem to be cause for concern, but they highlight the impotence of Taiwan’s anti-treason laws. Organizations such as the CUPP are potentially more problematic. However, the government’s efforts need to focus on investigating those overseas who are funding individual and group efforts at destabilizing the nation.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not