Chinese Douyin influencer “Yaya in Taiwan,” whose real name is Liu Zhen-ya, left Taiwan on March 25 after a deportation order. Although Liu had previously stated that she would refuse to leave after having her residency permit invalidated by the National Immigration Agency (NIA), Liu ultimately left before the deportation deadline. Liu stated that she reversed course because she was advised by lawyers that if she hoped to return to Taiwan in the future, she should voluntarily leave.
Liu, who has around 500,000 followers on the Chinese social media platform Douyin, came under scrutiny last month over videos expressing support for the unification of Taiwan and China by armed force. During military drills around Taiwan conducted by the People’s Liberation Army in May of last year, Liu stated that she hoped to wake up and see the streets full of red PRC flags. Statements by Liu suggested that China had just cause to annex Taiwan, and that “the mainland does not need any reason to reunify Taiwan by force.” Likewise, Liu was frequently dismissive in videos of the prospect of armed resistance by Taiwan, stating that “It is useless to buy weapons. It would be better to go back to the arms of the motherland,” and that purchases of U.S. arms were only “showing off in front of Lord Guan,” referring to the Chinese god of war.
Liu came under scrutiny after being reported to Taiwanese authorities as endangering national security by anti-CCP YouTuber Pa Chiung earlier in the month. Pa Chiung is best known for a two-part YouTube exposé on Chinese United Front efforts targeting Taiwan’s entertainment industry, involving former pro-CCP rapper Chen Po-yuan going undercover while ostensibly shooting promotional tourist videos for Taiwanese young people to visit China. The first video in the series attracted 2.4 million views in approximately one week, which is close to 10 percent of Taiwan’s 23 million population.
For her part, Liu initially denied expressing support for armed unification, claiming to support the peaceful unification of Taiwan and China. Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) responded to this by publicizing Liu’s Douyin videos, which contradicted her more recent claims, having previously met with her for talks that were framed as an opportunity for Liu to explain herself. During these meetings, MAC officials questions whether Liu had had contact with Chinese government officials or participated in United Front activities.
Liu had residency in Taiwan by virtue of marriage to a Taiwanese man. Her residency was revoked on the basis of Article 14 of the “Measures for the permission of family-based residence, long-term residence, and settlement of people from the Mainland Area in the Taiwan Area.” Authorities deemed Liu’s actions to endanger national security, in seeking to disrupt Taiwan’s democratic system, and to profit from this as an influencer. Liu will be blocked from reapplying for a residency permit for five years.
By contrast, Liu has claimed that the Taiwanese government’s actions violated her freedom of speech. Her defenders have included the opposition KMT, which has traditionally framed itself as defending the interests and rights of Chinese spouses of Taiwanese who reside in Taiwan. The KMT has long been interested in cultivating Chinese spouses who have acquired Taiwanese nationality as a demographic that would vote for it. Pro-unification left groups, such as Raging People Act Now, also rallied in Liu’s defense, similarly claiming that the DPP government was undermining basic principles of free speech.
The DPP and pro-Taiwan civil society groups, such as the Kuma Academy, Taiwan’s leading civil defense organization, preferred to depict the matter as one relating to Taiwan’s relationship with China rather than free speech. Specifically, they framed Liu’s comments as sensitive due to the fact that she is the national of an enemy nation that is militarily threatening Taiwan, while similar comments by nationals of countries that are not an enemy nation would not need to be taken as seriously.
To this extent, prominent activists such as Lee Ming-che – an NGO worker who was imprisoned for over five years by China on charges of “seeking to subvert the state” over exchanges with Chinese friends about Taiwan’s democratization – have described Liu’s comments as akin to hate speech. A comparison has been drawn between Liu’s comments and contemporary neo-Nazism.
Pro-Taiwan civil society groups have also criticized the KMT for raising an outcry about Liu, but having little to say about Li Yan-he, the Chinese publisher recently sentenced to three years in prison over books critical of the Chinese government. Li, who is better known by his pen name Fucha, is also married to a Taiwanese national. Li was detained after returning to China in March 2023, during a trip in which Li was planning on giving up his Chinese household registration in order to acquire Taiwanese nationality. Laws forbid Taiwanese nationals from simultaneously holding Chinese household registration.
This is not the only time that Chinese influencers have come under scrutiny in Taiwan either, though preceding controversies sometimes played out in reverse to the present one. Last year, YouTuber “Lia in Taiwan,” a Chinese national married to a Taiwanese person, was attacked by KMT legislator Hsu Chiao-hsin, who accused her of working for the DPP. “Lia” had a history of statements in support of Taiwan’s democracy, but at the time, pleaded that KMT politicians keep her out of the limelight so that she would still be able to visit friends and families in China. In late 2022, “Lia” experienced delays in receiving a travel permit from the Chinese government that would allow her to return to Taiwan, thought to be because of displeasure by Chinese authorities about her views.
Even if Liu has since departed Taiwan, the debate that broke out in Taiwan is unlikely to be quelled. For one, if the offending issue was that a Chinese national expressed support of the armed unification of Taiwan and China, one notes that many Taiwanese also hold such views – potentially including KMT lawmakers. That Liu’s comments were of public interest due to her being an influencer with a sizable following raises questions about whether influencers should be subject to laws regulating misinformation, disinformation, or propaganda.
More broadly, the Lai administration has taken a more aggressive posture on Taiwan’s national security as of late. Earlier in March, Lai announced a slew of measures, including reintroducing military courts to deal with espionage cases, and raising the barriers for individuals from China, Hong Kong, and Macau to acquire Taiwanese residency.
As of late, the Lai administration has proven more willing to not only criticize but potentially pursue legal action against individuals accused of engaging in United Front efforts. For example, apart from the Liu case, the MAC has suggested that it will look into whether Taiwanese celebrities who have made statements supportive of China’s claims over Taiwan hold Chinese national IDs. Again, current laws require Taiwanese who hold Chinese national IDs to forfeit their Taiwanese nationality. It may also fine them. The Ministry of the Interior has, too, called for the dissolution of pro-China political parties that have a history of engaging in violence and links to organized crime, such as the China Unification Promotion Party.
Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te probably has several target audiences in mind in announcing such new security measures. The first audience is domestic, driving up support for the current wave of recall petitions targeting pan-Blue politicians by emphasizing that Chinese threats to Taiwanese society can occur internally, rather than just externally. The second is international, in that the U.S. has called on Taiwan to do more for its own security, including taking action on frequent cases of defection or espionage in the Taiwanese military.
Early polling from respected pollster My-Formosa seems to indicate that the Lai administration may have received an uptick in approval from its security measures, while the KMT has seen a downturn in approval. Yet it also proves of note that pro-Taiwan civil society groups that usually slant progressive have tentatively sided with the Lai administration’s actions. More broadly, it appears as if Taiwan is on the precipice of greater securitization of society, something which did not take place under the preceding Tsai administration. Apart from that, this marks a point of departure for the Lai administration with its predecessor, reflecting the increasingly tense times that Taiwan faces.
Still, the controversy about pro-unification Chinese influencers is likely not over. Liu is not the only pro-unification Chinese influencer in Taiwan, with two other influencers now ordered to depart by the NIA. Although one of these influencers departed by the deadline set by the NIA, the other did not, setting the stage for an eventual confrontation with police.
