It is perhaps inevitable around the time of 228 Memorial Day that there is discussion of Taiwan's ethnic divisions and problems. This year it has been exacerbated by the presidential election. In the current atmosphere, where both sides see this election as make or break, the only thing that is surprising is that ethnic enmities haven't made their baleful influence felt more fully.
One of the interesting facts about ethnic campaigning in Taiwan is that it is always the pan-blues who speak out most loudly against it while they also benefit the most from ethnically motivated voting. The overwhelming majority of Mainlanders are pan-blue "iron votes." The pan-blues have always used ethnic campaigning to reinforce this by playing up a siege mentality among the Mainlanders, frightening them with tales of what a vengeful Hoklo-dominated Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would do were it elected -- remember the canard about canceling veterans' pensions?
And yet while the pan-blues promote ethnic voting among their core constituency, they also denounce it elsewhere. This is for the obvious reason that the pan-blues cannot get elected on Mainlander votes alone -- there simply aren't enough of them. So the pan-blues manage to have their ethnic cake and eat it. They play on ethnic fears to keep Mainlanders loyal and denounce ethnic campaigning to win over Taiwanese votes.
This is not to say that the DPP is without fault. Partly because of its origins as a party of the Hoklo gentry deprived of its political rights by Mainlander incomers, its recognition of the rights of other ethnic groups has been patchy. Only since the DPP became the governing party has it obviously reached out to Hakka voters, and its relationship to Aborigines is still far from ideal.
Nevertheless, given that the DPP obviously can win an election on Hoklo votes alone, it has been remarkably restrained. What could be easier than a campaign based on "Taiwanese should not vote for Chinese"? Yet there has been none of this in the election campaign so far. It is ironic that though it is the DPP that practices restraint when playing the ethnic card, it is the pan-blues who make most of the criticism.
It was interesting to hear that one of the pillars of Chinese Nationalist Party Chairman (KMT) Lien Chan's (
What this should be was symbolized by the 228 Hand-in-Hand rally on Saturday and, successful as that rally was in bolstering President Chen Shui-bian's (
Turning your back on China and turning toward the opportunity that for 300 years Taiwan has represented -- that is a pretty good definition of what it means to be a New Taiwanese. It is hard, however, to imagine Lien embracing such a concept.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS