Former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih (呂禮詩) at the opening of China’s Zhuhai Airshow on Tuesday last week said that he wanted to share with Taiwanese “how strong our China has become.”
The “military serviceman” mentioned in Article 9-3 of the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) refers to people who have served as a “major general or a higher rank post.”
The Ministry of National Defense and the Mainland Affairs Council said that because Lu is just a retired lieutenant commander, he is not subject to this provision.
Military personnel should have loyalty and integrity. This leniency not only sends a wrong signal to society, but also negatively impacts serving military personnel.
Lu’s case is reminiscent of retired general Tsang You-hsia (臧幼俠) standing to attention for the Chinese national anthem in an event in Hong Kong.
The ministry said Tsang was found guilty of contravening the act and it cut his pension by 75 percent for the next five years. Any honors he has received that are not related to his service would also be taken away.
A retired general usually receives a pension of NT$100,000 (US$3,082) per month. The cut would mean he would receive NT$75,000 less each month, or NT$4.5 million less over five years.
Meanwhile, a retired lieutenant commander such as Lu usually receives NT$50,000 per month. This loophole should be plugged as soon as possible.
The clause states that high-ranking officials and former officials such as generals and deputy ministers cannot participate in any “ceremony or activity held by political party, military, administrative or political agencies (institutions), or organizations of the mainland area which in turn harm the national dignity.”
That includes “saluting the flag or emblems, singing anthems or any other similar behavior that symbolize the political authority” of China, the article says.
The article was added in response to the case of retired lieutenant general Wu Sz-huai (吳斯懷), who went to Beijing, stood for the Chinese national anthem and listened to a speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
It was enacted so rashly that it is problematic in terms of legal principle.
By only prohibiting people who served as a major general or a higher rank from going to China for political events, its coverage is too limited.
Anyone who has served in influential posts should also be included.
Whether a retired military serviceperson is influential should be judged on a case by case basis to avoid a one-size fits-all approach.
The article should also elaborate on what behavior is harmful to national dignity instead of generalizing it as “any other similar behavior.”
As the Chinese Communist Party is using “united front” tactics and bait, it is important that assistance mechanisms for officers be reviewed and move with the times.
The government should foresee and be aware of a standard to differentiate right from wrong and improve morale. It is the basis on which military servicemen build their character and concerns the survival and well-being of the whole nation.
Apart from condemning the retired military serviceman, the ministry and the Veterans Affairs Council should advocate for the above clause to answer to the public and to do justice to serving military personnel.
Chao Hsuey-wen is an assistant professor and holds a doctorate in law from Fu Jen Catholic University.
Translated by Fion Khan
Prior to marrying a Taiwanese and moving to Taiwan, a Chinese woman, surnamed Zhang (張), used her elder sister’s identity to deceive Chinese officials and obtain a resident identity card in China. After marrying a Taiwanese, surnamed Chen (陳) and applying to move to Taiwan, Zhang continued to impersonate her sister to obtain a Republic of China ID card. She used the false identity in Taiwan for 18 years. However, a judge ruled that her case does not constitute forgery and acquitted her. Does this mean that — as long as a sibling agrees — people can impersonate others to alter, forge
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
In the weeks following the 2024 US presidential election, I have received one question more than any other from friends in Taiwan — how will Donald J. Trump’s return to the White House affect Taiwan and cross-Strait relations? Some Taiwan counterparts have argued that Trump hates China, so therefore he will support Taiwan, according to the logic that the enemy of one’s enemy is a friend. Others have expressed anxiety that Trump will put pressure on Taiwan to dramatically increase defense spending, or to compensate the United States for allegedly “stealing” America’s semiconductor sector. While I understand these hopes and concerns, I
RSS