Following the invitation of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), a Chinese university tour group visited Taiwan on an exchange trip. Regarding Taiwan’s win at the World Baseball Softball Confederation’s Premier12, Song Siyao (宋思瑤), a female student from Fudan University, said the tour group “would like to congratulate China, Taipei team on their win. We wish mainland China and Taiwan compatriots can be like the team Chinatrust Brothers and work together for the motherland to take baseball to a higher level.”
Belittling Taiwan by referring to it as “China, Taipei” and attributing the accomplishment of our team as belonging to the “motherland” subtly conveys China’s decisive stance on “reunification.” Upon hearing such remarks, one cannot help but feel angry.
In October, two Chinese people caused disturbances at an event related to Hong Kong in Taipei’s Ximending (西門町) area. The severity of the Chinese university tour group’s actions are far worse. It is baffling that the government has taken no action in response.
I support cross-strait exchanges and agree with Tsinghua University Chinese Communist Party committee secretary Qiu Yong’s (邱勇) words that “the youth represent hope and are the architects of the future.”
I also hope that “young people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait will have more opportunities to get to know each other and build meaningful relationships.”
However, a guest should exhibit basic courtesy to their host — one cannot stand on Taiwanese soil and spread China’s “reunification” rhetoric.
If the situation were reversed, and Taiwanese were to openly advocate for Taiwanese independence while in China, what would happen to them?
Some might say that the difference between Taiwan and China lies in respect for the individual and freedom of speech. In Taiwan, everyone has the right to express their views freely. Today, if it were Taiwanese that were openly promoting “reunification” in Taiwan, presenting the view as their own, with talk of becoming one big “family,” their right to an opinion should naturally be respected.
However, when a Chinese student tour group visits Taiwan for an exchange, they should comply with Taiwan’s policies, uphold reciprocity and dignity, and follow legal norms. The remarks made by the tour group do not fall within the scope of free speech — rather, they are an encroachment of China’s “reunification” agenda. It was an attempt to use subtle language to convey China’s domineering message of “reunification” and deliberately diminish Taiwan’s identity as a nation. It is entirely inappropriate.
The Mainland Affairs Council has reiterated that, “Mainland Chinese individuals must not engage in conduct that undermines our sovereignty, downgrades Taiwan, or violates our laws and regulations. Violators will be dealt with in accordance with law,” and that “the people of Taiwan are warm and hospitable, but we do not welcome disrespectful troublemakers.”
Article 12 of the Regulations on Permission for Entrance of People of the Mainland Area Into the Taiwan Area (大陸地區人民進入臺灣地區許可辦法) stipulates that Chinese entering Taiwan for professional exchanges who contravene the principles of reciprocity and dignity would have their permits revoked or canceled, and their entry or exit permits may be voided.
The words of the tour group’s representative, Song, clearly contravene the principles of reciprocity and dignity, and constitute the improper spread of Chinese “reunification” rhetoric. According to the regulations, Song’s remarks were an illegal act. Thus, the government should take effective measures.
Chiang Huang-chih is a professor of law at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS