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
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS