Taiwanese official's video at China forum sparks political row

Taitung County Magistrate Rao Ching-ling's participation in the Straits Forum via a pre-recorded video has sparked controversy, with government officials deeming it a violation of cross-strait regulations and vowing to investigate.

Rao, a member of the Kuomintang (KMT) party, had applied to attend the forum in mainland China but was denied permission by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). Despite the denial, she submitted a video message for the event, which included signing agreements for agricultural and fishery product procurement from Taiwan.

“

Which law has been violated by recording a video? Or is it that as long as the DPP dislikes it, they can first put a hat on it and then find a legal provision, using administrative power as a political cudgel to suppress dissidents?

Officials criticized Rao's video appearance as a cooperative act with Beijing's united front platform. They stated that such engagement, even through video, constitutes cooperation and will be investigated by the Ministry of Agriculture to determine if it contravenes the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area.

“

What crime is there in recording a video in Taiwan to promote agriculture? The DPP government insists on labeling it 'video cooperation.' This overbearing style of 'manufacturing guilt' completely tears off the disguise of the government's constant talk of 'caring for farmers.'

The KMT strongly condemned the government's stance. KMT legislative caucus whip Hsu Yu-chen questioned the legal basis for punishing a pre-recorded video message, accusing the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of wielding administrative power to suppress political opponents. Hsu argued that Rao's actions were aimed at promoting Taitung's agriculture and that the government's obstructionism harms local farmers.

Hsu further criticized the DPP for its perceived hypocrisy, claiming the party advocates for democracy while restricting local officials from supporting farmers. She demanded that the government present clear legal grounds for its actions or cease its intimidation tactics, warning against turning cross-strait regulations into a tool of "green authoritarianism" and using farmers' livelihoods for political battles.

“

The central government not only cannot help expand the market but crudely 'confiscates' the efforts of local governments to seek benefits for farmers through technical means, equivalent to cutting off the livelihoods of grassroots people, giving them no way to survive.