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.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath