Taiwan's geographical position was instrumental in putting it on the world stage during the great ocean-going age of the 16th century. It was because of this that the island became home to many different ethnic groups, and this ethnic diversity naturally led to the multicultural society we now have in Taiwan.
Ethnic and cultural diversity can easily cause ethnic and cultural conflict. If such differences are dealt with skillfully on a political level, however, this very diversity can be turned into a valuable asset for Taiwan.
In other words, if one does everything to avoid discord, remains broad-minded and designs a model in which all groups can be governed together, then this ethnic diversity will guarantee a wealth of talent. If one avoids discrimination and elitism and promotes a multicultural system, cultural diversity will ensure a blossoming culture. This is the first fundamental principle in planning for the future of Taiwan.
Complex historical factors have forced minority rule, colonialism and dictatorship on Taiwan throughout the past 400 years. This ended in 1996 when the Taiwanese people elected their president, ushering in a new era. This did not mean that Tai-wan was free of its pre-1996 historical baggage, and even now it is yet to break free of a triangle including the US and China.
The political reverberations left over from the end of World War II and the civil war fought between the Nationalists and Communists in China are still being felt today. The fallout has made Taiwan captive to the US and a renegade province that China stakes its claim to liberate.
Although Taiwan now meets all the criteria of a nation, it has yet to secure international recognition of its legitimate and full nationhood.
The US is a powerful nation quite capable of protecting its interests in Taiwan. That is not to say, however, that Taiwan has nothing bargain with. China is calling for unification, and if the Taiwanese want China to understand and respect their desire for autonomy, then they will also have to understand and respect why China has no alternative but to call for unification. Only then can the two sides move together in the same direction. It is far wiser to be positive than negative, and this would be a very important principle to follow.
American interests are not absolutely identical to those of China, and it would not be too difficult for Taiwan to secure benefit from both sides. What's more, globalization of the economy is inevitable, and this will significantly change international relations; even the concepts of national boundaries and arms need to be redefined. If we can deal with these changes well, we can reverse our current isolation. This is the second fundamental principle for planning for the future.
Taiwan's importance has always been the economic value of its productive output; this economic value has consistently assured its survival. Taiwan consequently needs to produce new ways of making money.
Taiwan has relied on different products at different times. In the past it has produced deer skins, camphor, tea, sugar, rice, clothes, jewelry, plastics and electronics. In the short term we can expect this role to be taken by bio-tech, but in the longer term the nation is likely to rely on its cultural and tourist industries. Why has no one in government sought to consolidate the various European, Chi-nese, Japanese, American and Aboriginal cultural resources that we have here? Could it be that no one up there has realized that the Pacific coast along Taitung is the nearest stretch of tropical coastline for the several hundred million tourists north of the Pashi Channel?
If these tourists were enticed to spend a few days each visiting Taiwan, and to spend NT$30,000 on Taiwan's cultural and tourism resources, this would become Taiwan's largest and most sustained source of economic interest. This idea needs to be seized and put into practice. Creating the conditions for cultural and tourist facilities of an international standard is the third fundamental principle.
The most important principle, however, needs to be recognized by the government, the opposition and the people. The present-day state of Taiwanese politics was not achieved through bloody revolution, but through a peaceful and gradual process. There is a huge difference between these two paths.
If there had been a revolution, the old system would have been overthrown and replaced by a new one overnight, and the differences between respective systems would have been stark. The non-violent route evades the tragic cost, but demands a kind of "payment in installments" from politicians and the people to offset the price of revolution. This installment plan entails its own kind of anguish, and changes in power and authority need to be borne with patience, tact, compromise and mutual consideration. This is the fourth fundamental principle in planning for the future.
Frank Wu is the chairman of the Public Television Service Foundation.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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