Some countries, and people, will gobble up nonsense the way these fish gobble up food from a little machine
Recently, Chris Horton had an excellent piece in Nikkei making the argument that the governments around the world who erase Taiwan’s reality as a sovereign, democratic nation are just as much to blame, if not more so, than China for its attempts to escalate such erasure.
I agree wholeheartedly: every country’s government is responsible for its own choices. Nobody is forcing them to pretend Taiwan doesn’t exist or treat it as a part of the PRC, which has never governed Taiwan. It is entirely within the capability of world leaders and legislatures to tell China, and Chinese pressure, to stick it. That they don’t is their own fault, and is objectively ethically questionable, if not outright wrong.
Imagine a toxic friend in some hellish version of junior high school, who consistently pressures you to bully and ignore the quiet, smart kid whom you actually kind of like, or at least don’t dislike or have a problem with. But your crappy friend harangues you if you don’t force this person to sit alone at lunch or struggle to find a partner for project work. Your crappy frenemy is rich and well-connected, so you go along with it.
It’s wrong, and you know it’s wrong, but you do it. The moral consequences of that are, however, on you. It’s still your choice to engage in bullying, and still your responsibility as a good person to refuse to engage with such behavior.
This is exactly what countries like Mauritius and the Seychelles are doing when they give in to Chinese pressure to deny Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te a flight path to visit diplomatic allies like Eswatini, which happened recently.
I’m glossing over how unscrupulous Taiwan’s relationship with a government like Eswatini is, because it’s really not the point. A bully told these countries to exclude someone they don’t like, and rather than stand up for what’s right, they give in. That’s not (just) on China, that’s on them.
The reaction of these governments is both simple and logical: China is huge, it’s tough to be on their bad side. There’s probably a lot of backlash headed their way if they say no to the bully, just as there would be in junior high school. I can understand how the decision seems straightforward in a realpolitik sort of way. It is, however, wrong.
The argument might be reframed very slightly, however. I do think we still need to keep an eye on China as the originator of the bullying. If they weren’t there insisting that Taiwan be excluded and treated as a non-entity, none of those countries would be engaging in Taiwan’s erasure. They — not Mauritius or Seychelles and anyone else who sidelines Taiwan — are the ultimate force setting up a culture of bullying in world affairs.
This is also slightly off topic, but I’ll try to bring it all together at the end. In my mind, I can’t help but connect this to the current public discussions of what freedom of speech means and guarantees, both generally and in Taiwan. I’ve been worried for some time at the consequences of the Taiwanese government denying entry to Taiwan for Chinese influencers who call the country “Taiwan, China” or say that Taiwan should be militarily annexed by China. There have also been Chinese influencers in Taiwan forced to leave for advocating similar positions.
Not because I think these people deserve to be allowed into Taiwan, nor because I think they are anything other than disingenuous, but because Taiwan choosing to stand up to China in a way that other countries won’t does give the opposition some ammunition.
Some people call this oppression, a denial of freedom of speech. I would argue that freedom of speech doesn’t extend to foreigners — especially those not currently in the country — who advocate for the destruction of said country.
I’ve said openly that I think the Chinese government should fall (from within: I’m not talking about, say, US invasion). I also genuinely believe China has every right to deny me entry if they so chose. I’m not actually a threat because there’s not much I could do toward taking down Xi Jinping. I’m nobody, and I’m not Chinese so it’s not my direct fight, but they wouldn’t be wrong to say that my views threaten the Chinese government’s interest.
Of course, I have no intention of trying to enter China to test this out. Why would I?
I do worry that taking a fairly firm stance on not allowing in influencers advocating for Taiwan to be annexed by China will look like suppression of speech, just enough to give enemies of the DPP ammunition. That is to say, a belief that the DPP can’t respect that some people truly believe Taiwan is part of China. Some KMTers (and TPPers) also believe this, so it looks like an attack on that viewpoint.
This is, as a friend put it, a simple and logical argument, but wrong. Some moron KMTer or TPPer has every right to their opinion that Taiwan is Chinese, or that China should take over Taiwan. As citizens, there’s not much to be done about their very loud wrongness. That same right does not necessarily extend to a non-citizen advocating enemy action against the country they are trying to enter, however.
It’s also Taiwanese law, which specifically states that the country has the right to deny entry to any foreign national who will “harm our national interest, public safety, public order”. Saying that Taiwan, under any name (including the Republic of China), should not exist does, at least to me, harm the national interest.
Just as it bullies other countries into erasing Taiwan, China is intentionally using these influencers to peddle an anti-Taiwan viewpoint. Betting that the current government will follow the letter of the law in not allowing them to enter or stay, they stir up public controversy and try to bully Taiwan into a definition of “freedom of speech” that has never actually been the law.
Perhaps at one point the primary target of this disinformation was the Chinese public, but they’re increasingly pushing it in Taiwan, as well. Chinese social media is rife with attempts to deceive Taiwanese into selling out their own country in the name of “peace”, when the lack of peace is actually perpetrated by China, not Taiwan. None (or essentially none) of these people are innocent popular influencers who merely have an opinion that contradicts the DPP. They are disinformation peddlers, and it is intentional.
I do happen to think that if someone genuinely believes Taiwan should be Chinese, they have a right to that opinion, just not the right to enter Taiwan. Just as I have the right to my opinion that the Chinese government should topple, but not the right to enter China, per se.
Taiwan, like all those countries who have the ability to tell China to stuff it, still has the right to react to this as it wants. The world has chosen to bend over for China. To deny airspace, participation in global organizations, the right to use their own name in sporting events, or anything else, because China says so. Taiwan has chosen to react to this threat and treat China as the enemy state it is — essentially standing up to a bully in a way that the rest of the world won’t.
China wants the Taiwanese government to erase itself, to allow disinformation peddlers to enter the country and poison the discourse. Taiwan has chosen to say no.
The DPP will get pummeled for it, though: I already see the discussions online and it doesn’t look good. There’s a lot of backlash, some of it real, some manufactured, some amplified by a media environment that prioritizes sensation. Again, this reaction is simple and logical: it looks anti-free speech. It’s also wrong.
No posts
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.