An army officer and a suspected spy were arrested and questioned on Monday, while four others involved in the case were released on bail, the High Prosecutors’ Office said.
Lawyer and former prosecutor Weng Wei-lun (翁偉倫) said that the case differs from previous espionage cases, which primarily involved retired military personnel who were recruited abroad and who accepted gifts in exchange for information. Beijing is increasingly “reaching into Taiwan” and targeting active military officers, he said.
The situation might reveal that Beijing is not fully confident in its ability to occupy Taiwan militarily, and wants to gain a better grasp of Taiwan’s missile installations and other defensive capabilities to gain an advantage in a potential military conflict. Conversely, this also means that China could be preparing for conflict.
This possibility is supported by the increasing frequency and scope of China’s military drills in and around the Taiwan Strait in recent years. Given the increasing risk of a military conflict with China, it is imperative that no leniency be shown in espionage cases — particularly those involving members of the armed forces or the government.
Japan’s Nikkei newspaper on Feb. 28 quoted an anonymous source as saying that up to 90 percent of Taiwan’s military retirees have spent time in China, where they provided information to Beijing in exchange for money. The Ministry of National Defense at the time denied the report, but even if the number of traitorous retirees were half as many as claimed, the threat to military secrets would still be daunting.
If money is the main motivator for military retirees to commit treason, then active military personnel would likely be similarly motivated to commit such acts. One recent case involved a suspected spy who cased pawnshops frequented by military personnel to identify those with money problems who would be most susceptible to recruitment for espionage.
Clearly, Taiwan would be unable to compete with China using money to ensure the loyalty of military personnel, so the alternative is to make the punishment for spying severe enough to be a deterrent.
Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲), director of the Institute of National Defense and Security Research’s Division of Defense Strategy and Resources, in May said that military spies in Taiwan are given an average prison sentence of 18 months, compared with the average sentence of 19 years for similar offenses in other democracies.
Some people found guilty of endangering the nation have even been given suspended sentences, Deputy Minister of Justice Tsai Pi-chung (蔡碧仲) said.
CTBC Business School Department of Business and Economic Law associate professor Chen Tsung-chien (陳重見) suggested that the problem might stem from Taiwanese judges’ poor understanding of national security issues, and suggested that a specialized court should try all national security cases.
Regardless of how cases are tried, Taiwan needs legislation that adequately defines espionage-related offenses, and that stipulates heavy mandatory sentences for all violations.
Those aspiring to commit treason have little to lose and much to gain. If the Chinese government offers members of Taiwan’s armed forces significant compensation for spying, and puts the money into an account in China where it is beyond the reach of Taiwan’s judiciary, then little reason exists for someone not to risk one or two years in prison knowing they have a great deal of wealth waiting for them when they get out.
If prospective traitors were facing the possibility of 10 to 20 years in prison and of being permanently barred from leaving Taiwan, as well as close financial scrutiny, they would be much less motivated to spy for China and risk being caught.
The government needs to be heavy-handed in dealing with spies before it is too late, or it risks the entire military becoming compromised in the face of growing efforts by China to infiltrate Taiwan.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then