The first time the Dalai Lama wanted to visit after President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九)  took office, the Tibetan spiritual leader was turned down because it was not an  “appropriate time for him to visit.” When World Uyghur Congress president and  former political prisoner Rebiya Kadeer was invited to visit, the government  said she was “linked to terrorists.”
Then there were the beat-ups. World  Uyghur Congress secretary-general Dolkun Isa had not even planned to visit when  the National Immigration Agency barred him based on intelligence from a  “friendly country” indicating that he had links to terrorist groups. Isa, who  has visited Taiwan before, was surprised and disappointed. 
Falun Gong  founder Li Hongzhi (李洪志) might be equally surprised to hear that he, too, is not  welcome in Taiwan — even though he has not made public any plans to  come.
Last week, the Chinese-language China Times reported that the  Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) intended to invite Li to visit. This could  only be interpreted as a “provocation” designed to push the government into  another awkward refusal of a Beijing foe who poses no risk to public order or  national security.
Each refusal is an embarrassment that highlights the  government’s willingness to stifle free speech to appease its authoritarian  neighbor. Its rejection of Kadeer was perhaps even more cringeworthy than that  of the Dalai Lama, because Minister of the Interior Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺)  gratuitously linked a peaceful democracy activist to violent elements. That is  rhetoric often heard from Beijing on both the Dalai Lama and Kadeer, but this  was the first time the Taiwanese government has chimed in.
On Li’s case,  National Security Bureau Director Tsai Der-sheng’s (蔡得勝) response was as telling  as Jiang’s. In a legislative question-and-answer session, Tsai said a visit by  Li would “damage cross-strait ties.”
This is precisely the government’s  reason for shunning Kadeer and the Dalai Lama, who was later allowed to visit in  the aftermath of Typhoon Morakot, but snubbed by Ma.
Tsai’s bluntness is  noteworthy. It may indicate that the government is smarting after its claims  about Kadeer backfired, drawing much negative publicity. Yet it is surprising  that Tsai felt obliged to offer information on Li at all. No one — the newspaper  that first published the report about Li, the DPP legislator who asked Tsai  about him or Tsai himself — seems concerned with just how implausible a visit by  Li at the invitation of the DPP is.
Li is described by people who know  him as intensely private. He has long avoided the limelight, although there is  no shortage of news outlets and other audiences who would be interested in  hearing his opinions on the persecution of Falun Gong, the stability of Chinese  Communist Party rule and other matters in his home country.
Tsai, like  Jiang, offered more information than was called for, raising the question of  whether he was pandering to Beijing.
His comments may have pleased China,  even if Zhongnanhai is probably not concerned about Li visiting  Taiwan.
After the security bureau’s frankness, it would be interesting to  hear the government’s response if another of China’s star dissidents were  invited. The DPP may never have planned to invite Li, but perhaps it should draw  up a list of other thorns in China’s side. There is good reason to be  intentionally provocative: Barring peaceful dissidents to avoid upsetting  Beijing is deplorable and must be confronted. 
Source: Taipei Times - Editorials 2009/10/14
| < Prev | Next > | 
|---|



 
 












 
		