Fifteen years after his death, late-president Chiang Ching-kuo
There are at least two political ends served by the KMT's move.
First, by exalting Chiang and asking the PFP and the New Party to join the chorus, the KMT strengthens the internal cohesion of the pan-blue camp and at the same time solidifies its leadership role within that camp. This, of course, puts the PFP in a rather awkward spot. It is a well-known fact that PFP Chairman James Soong
Second, by declaring that Chiang is its spiritual leader and icon in this way, the KMT is deliberately severing its ties with the 12-year reign of Lee Teng-hui
This, of course, is completely absurd.
It cannot be denied that Chiang made significant contributions to Taiwan, especially in terms of economic development. Moreover, during the last few years of his rule, Chiang did plant the seeds for the democratization and development of Taiwan after his death. Lee, who succeeded Chiang as president, was the person who gave these seeds the water and nutrients they needed to blossom.
But it is also very important to point out that Chiang's efforts began relatively late in life. He was so sick that he knew his days were numbered. He also knew perfectly well that he had no suitable heir-apparent.
Furthermore, it cannot be denied that Chiang's reign was an era of military dictatorship and White Terror. In fact, even when Chiang Kai-shek
If there was one thing that distinguished the younger Chiang from his father, it was probably the pragmatism of Chiang Ching-kuo. Perhaps as a former communist and atheist, Chiang Ching-kuo was by nature more practical than his fascist father.
At the very least, Chiang Ching-kuo apparently came to realize the impossibility of retaking the Chinese mainland and therefore was willing to make an effort to develop Taiwan and make it his home.
While Chiang Ching-kuo was perhaps an improvement on his father, this in no way means he deserves the worship he has received from the KMT recently. By deifying such a controversial figure, the KMT gains something and loses something.
In the short run, idolizing Chiang may help the KMT to obtain pan-blue cohesion and leadership. In the long run, the damage may outweigh the good.
After all, in the minds of many people, the name of Chiang Ching-kuo is synonymous with "alien regime" and "White Terror."
Many of those people still remember a time when they had to worship the Chiangs -- father and son.
Stirring up those kind of memories can only cause resentment.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS