Apart from the fracas in the legislature last week, two other events warrant attention.
The first is Internet celebrity Chung Ming-hsuan (鍾明軒) and his trip to China.
In his vlog, he talked about how China is a wonderful place, fawning — in exasperated awe — over the luxurious facades of the cities he visited, and how he received a friendly and welcoming reception from some Chinese.
Seeing is believing, and his videos and descriptions immediately invited heated discussion.
The second has to do with Chinese spouses of Taiwanese citizens. On Thursday last week, prosecutors charged Ho Jianghua (何建華), the former chairwoman of the Taipei-based Chinese Women’s Federation -— which advocates for Chinese spouses of Taiwanese — and former secretary Pao Ke-ming (包克明) for accepting funding from the All-China Federation of Taiwan Compatriots, which is part of the United Front Work Department of the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee.
They solicited money to form and grow their organization and spread disinformation, among other activities, prosecutors said.
The Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office’s court of first instance ultimately found them “not guilty.”
Looking at these two events, several important points must be discussed.
First, from a simple tourism standpoint, Shanghai and Beijing are internationalized Chinese cities. It does not take much effort to see that the two cities are bustling.
Anyone could understand why Chung would share his observations on everything he saw and heard while touring the cities.
Second, the problem is that Chung is not just another tourist. Many of his previous videos mention that he is Taiwanese and that he once loathed China.
Given China’s Counter-Espionage Law and its National Security Law, Chung’s commentaries could land him in a lot of hot water or get him arrested and tried. It would all boil down to whether the Chinese government felt compelled to do so.
China’s Counter-Espionage Law and National Security Law state that activities such as taking a photograph, recording a video, using maps with GPS, searching for official or local business information on the Internet, talking to or holding interviews with locals and participating in religious activities could all be seen as grounds for influencing national security and could lead to arrest and incarceration.
However, there is considerable leeway for these laws.
Chinese authorities did not make things difficult for Chung — this was nothing more than a template created by Beijing to further spread its propaganda.
Chung has unwittingly fallen into an incredibly dangerous trap.
If he keeps “carrying China’s water” and reinforcing its “facade,” travelers going to China might end up copying his behavior and causing themselves a lot of legal pain and punishment.
Third, China’s rule “by” law is not the West’s rule “of” law.
We might be acquitted if we are charged under the National Security Act (國家安全法) in Taiwan, because the nation has a constitutional right to an independent judiciary.
Chinese law and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) have repeatedly asserted that China absolutely cannot adopt a three-body system of government, with a separation of powers and an independent judicial system.
They have also asserted that laws are to be weaponized, that China should actively participate in the formulation of international rules and regulations, and that it should become a promoter and leader of global governance.
If the Chungs of the world contravened China’s laws, they would be arrested and tried there.
Do not be misled into thinking that China’s laws are the same as Taiwan’s, where people can be acquitted or be found innocent.
Taiwan’s national security laws and Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) are imposed based on evidence, but that is a separate conversation for another time.
A country does not define democracy, human rights and the rule of law by how it treats people with the same opinions as those in power, but rather by how it treats those in opposition.
China wants to develop technology, travel and tourism, but each Chinese tourist and person with technical acumen has been cultivated to have the exact same goal as the Chinese government.
It is too late for China to welcome everyone with different opinions.
Of course, China cannot suppress everyone. People should pay attention to those who hold opposing views from the Chinese government: intellectuals, human rights lawyers and international firms that wish to realize corporate rights in China. They have been suppressed, arbitrarily — and indiscriminately — arrested and investigated.
This point is related to an individual’s wealth and status, life and Taiwan’s national security.
The Chung Ming-hsuans of the world would do well to keep all of this in mind.
Carol Lin is a law professor in the Graduate Institute of Technology Law at National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University.
Translated by Tim Smith
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS