On March 13, Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te held a surprise national press conference to announce new measures to curb Beijing’s infiltration and influence. Lai particularly mentioned the military, press, businesspeople, influencers, religious groups, politicians, and entertainers as groups China had sought to co-opt or recruit.
Taiwan frequently sees cases involving active duty or retired members of the Taiwanese military who are implicated in Chinese spying. In the most recent case, a retired Air Force major, Shih Chun-cheng, persuaded former Air Intercept Controller Hsu Chan-cheng to leak information on Taiwan’s response to Chinese air incursions in exchange for payment. Shih himself is thought to have leaked classified files from 2021 to August 2024, when authorities raided his home.
Espionage cases involving members of the military have been a recurring theme in past years. But as brought up by Lai in his speech, the number of arrests for such spying cases is on the rise.
The type of spying cases has also diversified. For example, in January, a retired lieutenant general, Kao An-kuo, was detained along with other former military personnel over receiving Chinese funding and instructions to form a paramilitary cell that would seek to act as a fifth-column in wartime. It is relatively new to hear of arrests over attempts to form sleeper cells that become active in wartime, rather than simply espionage cases.
These espionage cases point to the identity issues that Taiwan continues to face. For example, at 80 years old, Kao is among the last generation of military personnel who were born in China before the KMT fled to Taiwan after the Chinese Civil War.
Yet the past year has seen not just spying cases, but increased concern about Chinese influence on the entertainment industry. For one, it has long been an established phenomenon that Taiwanese entertainers working in the Chinese market repost statements by Chinese state-run media that emphasize territorial claims over Taiwan. As of late, the Lai administration has hit out at these entertainers, with the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) criticizing them for denigrating Taiwan’s sovereignty.
But there has been increased concern in Taiwan in past months about the issue of Taiwanese influencers being paid by China to produce pro-China content intended to win over the public. The issue exploded into the public attention with a viral video produced by anti-CCP YouTuber Pa Chiung that showed the process by which Chinese United Front organizations subsidize and pay for Taiwanese entertainers to produce content intended to depict China in a positive light. The video attracted 2.4 million views in approximately one week.
The video featured rapper Chen Po-yuan, who previously was himself a pro-CCP influencer but had since changed political stances, going through the production process for travel content aimed at showing the economic opportunities that Taiwanese young people can have in China. After the video, there has also been controversy about the number of Taiwanese who hold Chinese national IDs, as the video showed the process for Taiwanese to obtain Chinese national IDs was very easy.
The Lai administration has since mandated that public servants and members of the military cannot hold Chinese national IDs. Current laws stipulate that Taiwanese who hold Chinese national IDs invalidate their nationality. At least one member of the navy later self-reported having a Chinese national ID, which their Chinese mother applied for without their knowledge. The government has emphasized that this individual will not lose their Taiwanese nationality. The MAC has stated it will investigate Taiwanese entertainers residing in China who express support for Chinese claims over Taiwan to determine whether they hold Chinese national IDs. If they do, per current laws, they will lose their Taiwanese nationality.
Most of the measures that Lai announced in his press conference had previously been floated. Lai touted funding for Taiwanese young people, particularly cultural creators, to provide business opportunities that do not involve needing to travel to China. It is unclear how the Lai administration would pay for such measures, however, given the extensive budget cuts pushed for by the KMT-controlled legislature at present.
But the key measures announced by Lai were mostly security-focused. Given rising concern about Chinese infiltrators, who may pose as originating from Hong Kong or Macau, the government will increase the time required for individuals of Hong Kong or Macau origin to obtain permanent residency in Taiwan, while curbing some of the paths that currently exist for them to acquire Taiwanese citizenship. Although the government claims that it will consult with Hong Kong civil society groups in Taiwan before rolling out these measures, it is unclear what the effect will be on Hong Kongers seeking refuge in Taiwan.
Lai’s announcement took place shortly after the National Immigration Agency announced that it would be invalidating the residency of a Chinese woman living in Taiwan who is married to a Taiwanese national. The woman is an influencer on the video platform Douyin and has produced videos that expressed support for China to annex Taiwan using military force. Since the incident, several other Chinese influencers may also have their residency permits canceled. In Beijing, Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Chen Binhua argued that the move showed Taiwan’s repression of political freedoms.
Lai also stated that Chinese groups linked to the United Front will be blocked from traveling to Taiwan. This suggests that the Lai administration will block some of the Chinese government officials who travel to Taiwan as part of diplomatic delegations to meet with KMT officials, such as the city-based cross-strait exchanges held annually between Taipei and Shanghai. During the most recent exchange event, which was held in December as a single-day event, the MAC blocked the applications of 10 people in the 103-member delegation that traveled from Shanghai to Taipei.
Likewise, a new mechanism for government officials – whether public servants, borough chiefs, or legislators – to report travel to China will be rolled out.
There have been longstanding concerns about borough chiefs – the lowest level of elected political office in Taiwan at the neighborhood level – taking their constituents to China as part of subsidized tour groups, in which the participants are given tours intended to promote and strengthen pro-unification sentiment. It was only during the 2024 election cycle that Taiwan’s government moved to crack down on the practice, with borough chiefs summoned for questioning over participating and organizing these tours. The practice is widespread, with 30 percent of borough chiefs in Taipei found to have joined tours partially subsidized by the Chinese government.
But as of late, there has also been more focus on travel to Hong Kong or China by KMT politicians such as KMT caucus leader Fu Kun-chi. The new mechanism is probably intended to pressure the KMT into compliance.
Fu has spearheaded ongoing efforts by the KMT to drastically cut the national budget, as well as freeze the Constitutional Court. Fu has been accused by Lai’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of launching new efforts intended to stymie the operations of government after returning from trips to China.
Fu’s most recent trip to Hong Kong was in February, to attend the Hong Kong International Travel Expo. But this trip drew criticism in particular because Fu sought to hide that he had traveled to Hong Kong, instead posting on Facebook that he was absent from cross-party negotiations in the legislature due to illness. Unusually, Fu was outed as having traveled to China by Legislative Yuan President Han Kuo-yu, who also belongs to the KMT.
It later emerged that a member of Fu’s delegation was arrested while entering Hong Kong over money laundering charges from several decades back. Fu was criticized by the DPP for not assisting this member of his delegation, nor reporting the detention of this individual to the MAC. The MAC pointed to cases in past years of Taiwanese held by Chinese authorities on arbitrary charges.
KMT politicians have also been accused of receiving funding from the Chinese government during trips to China. This includes Fu. Police searched his offices last week over campaign goods that may have been provided by the Chinese government, seeing as they did not appear to have been paid for. The new mechanism probably will further scrutinize whether KMT politicians receive cash or other material gifts during trips to China.
Yet perhaps the most discussed of Lai’s new measures was the announcement that military courts will be reintroduced to deal with espionage cases. The idea of military courts began to be floated earlier this year, with the suggestion that civilian courts were inadequate to deal with such cases due to civilian judges not knowing enough about espionage cases.
In Taiwan, espionage cases often receive light punishments or are thrown out. Some have alleged that such rulings occur at the hand of “dinosaur judges” appointed during the KMT’s one-party rule, who make rulings to defend those they politically align with. But, ironically, the idea of military courts – which were only abolished in Taiwan in 2013 – is one that harkens back to Taiwan’s authoritarian period.
It proves a strange twist of history, then, that the KMT has taken a strong stance against the notion of military courts. The KMT suggested that it may organize a national referendum against military courts, while also claiming that Lai’s suggestion is an affront to the dignity of the military.
The KMT’s framing would be to invoke the history of martial law. The suggested text for the referendum question would read: “Given that President Lai has designated China a foreign hostile force, placing cross-strait relations in a quasi-war state, do you support following Ukraine’s example by implementing martial law and reinstating military tribunals?”
Although the reference is to Ukraine in this question, the implicit comparison may be to President Yoon Suk-yeol’s abortive declaration of martial law in South Korea. Controversy ensued in Taiwan after a social media post by the DPP that initially expressed support for the declaration of martial law. The post was quickly deleted and replaced with a statement that condemned martial law, emphasized that it was the KMT who maintained martial law in Taiwan for decades, and that stated the DPP was against the authoritarian past returning in Taiwan today. Yet the damage had been done, with the social media post providing ammunition for KMT claims that the DPP is seeking to impose authoritarianism on Taiwan.
The KMT can broadly be expected to take a strong stance against the Lai administration’s measures. The party is likely to attack the expulsion of Chinese nationals married to Taiwanese as infringing on the rights of Chinese spouses of Taiwanese, a voter demographic that the KMT has traditionally framed itself as defending. More generally, attempts to crack down on United Front efforts will be framed as the Lai administration seeking to squash dissenting political views. The KMT has accused the DPP of being engaged in a “Green Terror” since the Tsai administration and this accusation is likely to continue.
The KMT will have to decide how far it will lean into defending pro-unification groups or individuals. In November 2024, the Ministry of the Interior (MOI) called for the dissolution of the China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP). The CUPP, which is led by ex-gangster Chang An-lo, retains links to organized crime and has been implicated in violent attacks on student demonstrators, as well as Hong Kong activist Joshua Wong during his past trips to Taiwan. The MOI accused the CUPP of crimes including accepting Chinese funding, interfering in elections, violating laws on foreign interference, murder, and human trafficking.
Though the Lai administration was likely hoping to test the waters by going after a low-hanging fruit, the proposal met resistance from KMT politicians as legislator Weng Hsiao-ling. Weng, a firebrand who has also courted controversy over comments that Taiwanese are Chinese, suggested that the government should instead seek to dissolve pro-independence political parties such as the Taiwan Statebuilding Party. Weng is also known for introducing legislation that would allow members of the military and public servants to salute the Chinese flag or sing the Chinese national anthem without punishment.
Yet some KMT politicians, such as party chair Eric Chu, have warned that the party faces backlash over comments by Weng and other outspoken legislators. It remains to be seen, then, how the KMT frames its response to the Lai administration’s latest actions.
Also in question is how the public will react to the measures announced by Lai. Taiwanese are sensitive to actions by political parties that recall Taiwan’s past authoritarianism. Indeed, Lai holding a national press conference on his new measures was likely to give the KMT political ammunition; he might have been better served simply rolling the changes out quietly. But with a wave of ongoing recall campaigns targeting all KMT legislators over the KMT’s actions to cut the budget and freeze the Constitutional Court, it is probable that Lai had electoral considerations in mind with his press conference. He may be seeking to rally DPP supporters by emphasizing the threats that Taiwan faces from China – and forcing the KMT into the awkward position of opposing measures to defend Taiwan.
