The debates in the Examination Yuan over the scope of the test on the subject of "national history and geography" in the qualification exam of entry-level civil servants next year highlights the fundamental problem of national identification within Taiwan -- which has become the root of many problems here. Just what exactly is the "national history and geography" of this country?
In other countries of the world where people do not have a self-contradictory and confused national identity, this would be a simple question that even elementary school children could answer. However, this is not the case in Taiwan, where not even those with PhD degrees in history and geography can necessarily give the right answer.
The question is this: Does the country's national history and geography mean Taiwan's history and geography? The common-sense answer would of course seem to be "yes." Unfortunately, too many people in Taiwan do not seem to have that kind of basic common sense. In national examinations at all levels, ranging from qualification examinations for civil servants to entry examinations for senior high schools and universities, Chinese history and geography continues to be tested as "national history and geography." Moreover, national history and geography textbooks used in schools of all levels also focus predominantly on Chinese history and geography.
In fact, even Mongolia, which is an independent country formally recognized by the world, is treated as part of this country in these tests and textbooks. Anyone who so much as bothers to suggest or recommend that the definition of "national history and geography" be redefined to conform with reality is condemned for blasphemy. That is exactly what has happened in the current debate in the Examination Yuan.
Lin Yu-Ti (
The ironic thing is this: Those who insist that Chinese history and geography be labeled "national history and geography" are even more blinded by their personal "one China" ideology. Otherwise, it is hard to imagine how they can persist in their arguments while turning a blind eye to the fact that China is not just another country to Taiwan, but a hostile country that many consider to be an enemy state. As pointed out by Lin, one purpose of the national civil servant examinations is to select those who can vow their loyalty to this country and the Taiwan government.
Isn't it ironic, and dangerous, if those chosen actually think that Taiwan is part of China? Won't they feel confused about where their loyalty lies, and to which government -- that of Taiwan or that of China -- they owe allegiance? According to the pan-blue lawmakers, Taiwan's civil servants should not be taught to be narrow-minded and they need to learn as much about the world as possible. It is therefore wrong, they say, to exclude Chinese history and geography.
They are right, of course. But while it is a good thing to learn as much as possible about Chinese history and geography, these subjects should be studied as part of world history and geography instead. Moreover, Chinese geography and history that is related to Taiwan may of course still be included in teaching and testing "national history and geography."
One is not even talking about amending the Constitution to completely reflect the political reality of this country, which requires dealing with much greater political complications and pressures -- in particularly those coming from China and the US. Yet these opponents still put up a strong fight. This only highlights the magnitude of our national identity problem.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS