MAC: Hoping that the Chinese authorities can show more courage to bring about long-term peace and stability in cross-strait relations
The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) indicated on December 27, 2006 that in recent years China has imposed comprehensive and strict controls on information disseminated by the domestic and foreign media. Under this policy, it can be said “freedom of the press” has never existed in China. China's Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) announced today that during the period of the upcoming Beijing 2008 Olympic Games, restrictions on reporting by Taiwan’s media would be eased. This move is intentionally taken by China to create the false impression of media exchanges with Taiwan. However, no democratic country in the world will impose time limits on the rights of reporters to cover the news and then nullify those rights at the end of that period. China's announcement today of new regulations governing news coverage has openly proved to the world that the Chinese authorities lack all familiarity with and respect for freedom of the press.
The MAC emphasizes that the freedom to report and circulate news and information is an important link in the development of democracy. It is also a fundamental understanding of the world towards democracy, human rights and liberty. China's lack of the concept of freedom of the press has attracted intense concern and criticism from the international community. In its 2006 worldwide press freedom index, Reporters Without Borders ranked China sixth from the bottom. In China the news media is treated merely as an organ to serve the political system and a medium for social stability control.
MAC indicates that over the past several years, China has continued to comprehensively step up suppression of the news and internet; to draft various regulations that obstruct or destroy freedom of the press; and to strengthen the review, penalization and monitoring of domestic and foreign media. In 2006, for example, the Chinese authorities arrested opposition writers Yang Tianshui on charges of subverting the government; assaulted the deputy editors-in-chief of the Taizhou Evening News and the Epoch Times; ordered Freezing Point weekly magazine to cease publication and fired its editor-in-chief; pressured Google and other internet search engines; seized the property of Sohu.com, Sina.com, and the Chinese Wikipedia; established an internet monitoring center and internet police force to comprehensively monitor information; detained foreign media reporters Zhao Yan and Cheng Xiang on charges of revealing state secrets; conducted mass arrests of human rights advocates; drafted the “Contingency Law to Emergencies,” “Measures for Administering the Release of News and Information in China by Foreign News Agencies,” and other regulations as tools for tightening suppression of press freedom. If China truly has the intention of embracing freedom of the press, why has it not dared to the present day to allow access to Taiwanese news sources on the internet?
The MAC further states that for many years, China has intended through undemocratic procedures and “non-peaceful” means to pressure the Taiwanese people to accept its rigid political positions. It has also intended in the international arena to brutally change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. In 2006, China brazenly and shamefully seized flags of the Republic of China from athletes during the International Children's Games in Thailand. At the World Firefighters Games, when contestants from other countries were allowed to bring their national flags into the game venues, Chinese officials not only demanded that Taiwanese contestants be barred from doing so, but also insisted that the name of Taiwan’s team be changed to “China Taipei.” When China sought to join the Taiwan-sponsored International Crisis Group, Beijing demanded that Taiwan change its membership name to “Taiwan, China” or “Chinese Taipei.” China also demanded that Taiwan change its membership name in the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to “Taiwan, Province of China” and its membership name in the Lions Club International from “MD 300 Taiwan” to “MD 300 China Taiwan.” It has also demanded that the ROC National Association of Shipping Agencies, the Taiwan Society for Horticultural Science, the Taiwan External Trade Development Council (TAITRA) and other civilian organizations should change their membership name to “Taiwan, China” and so on when participating in international non-governmental organizations.
China's international actions to completely suffocate the space for the survival and movement of the 23 million Taiwanese people have fueled the resentment and reaction of the Taiwanese government and people. China has concocted the label of Taiwan's quest for independence to varnish over its ill-intentioned acts to unilaterally change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. The MAC solemnly reiterates that, over the past decade the Chinese authorities have been ignorant of the fact that Taiwan and China have no jurisdiction over each other, and they have repeatedly attempted to use a carrot and stick approach to forcing (or luring) the international community and various sectors in Taiwan to accept its political position. These are the main reasons that it has not been possible to maintain long-term peace in the Taiwan Strait situation since 1995.
The MAC expresses that maintaining peace in the Taiwan Strait is not only the established policy of the Taiwanese government, but also a goal that the government has consistently made every effort to achieve for over the past six years. With the joint support of the Taiwanese people and the understanding and affirmation of Taiwan's international friends, it has been possible so far to maintain positive interactive relations across the Strait. However, as long as the Chinese authorities do not change their way of thinking, there will be an unstable variable in the cross-strait situation. The MAC urges China again that, in facing up to the status quo in which Taiwan and China have no jurisdiction over each other, the Chinese authorities should show greater courage just as what they have done in their adherence to the road to development. Only in this way can long-term peace and stability in cross-strait relations be truly realized one day.