Recently, Examination Yuan member Lin Yu-ti (林玉体) kicked up a dispute over the national history and geography test in the entry-level national civil service examinations. Examination Yuan President Yao Chia-wen's (姚嘉文) reaction to the dispute was to simply abolish the test. This way of avoiding a unification-independence dispute may seem the perfect way of dealing with the issue. But just like Lin's statements, this is simply a matter of giving up substance for form.
Lin's reason was that "this nation" means Taiwan, and so "national history and geography" should of course mean Taiwanese history and geography. Such a conclusion makes logical sense from a Taiwan independence perspective, and it also successfully advances the movement to rectify the national title. But a more fundamental question is what basic knowledge we expect Taiwan's civil servants to have.
Wu Tai-cheng (
Yao's proposal to abolish the test makes sense on one condition only: that Taiwan's civil servants don't need historical and geographic knowledge of either China or Taiwan. Some may think it more important for a civil servant to have fundamental knowledge of modern economic, social and democratic issues than of history and geography.
The issue, however, involves the question of what demands we have on the education of civil servants. It is a comprehensive issue requiring study and debate, and not something that is solved by simply abolishing a test at the first sign of a unification-independence conflict. The selection of civil servants is not a children's game.
Taiwanese education has undeniably had a longstanding China bias, while ignoring local knowledge. Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng (
It could be debated whether these are the ideal proportions. But at least Tu has defined a standard for educational content, to be further reflected in examinations. This differs from the Examination Yuan's persistence in making names logically coherent and changing or abolishing tests without considering real needs.
Furthermore, don't Taiwan's civil servants need to understand Chinese history and geography? Lin says they all remain in Taiwan after completing their terms as civil servants. Asking rhetorically whether they are to be sent off to work in China, he adds that there is no need to test knowledge of Chinese history and geography.
Whether from a cultural, economic or political perspective, Taiwan's development has always been and always will be affected by external factors. Some say Taiwan sits on the periphery of the international system, and some say it is squeezed between empires, its development being circumscribed by China, Japan and the US, with China's influence being the strongest.
Must Taiwan's people and civil servants understand China? Yao has asked whether a national history and geography test dealing with China should deal with the Taiwanese or the current Chinese version. That is the wrong question. We can understand China, and need to explain it, from a Taiwanese perspective.
As an East Asian country that is part of the Chinese world, there is no reason for Taiwan to actively give up its right to define China's history and culture. Passing that right to China would weaken Taiwan's cultural, intellectual, political and economic status globally and enhance Chinese control over Taiwan.
Yao was right in saying that Lin's appointment as head of the basic-level civil servant recruitment examination committee could not be opposed just because Lin favors Taiwan independence. Lin will of course bring his ideals to bear on his professional duties. But normalizing Taiwan's abnormal situation doesn't only entail rectifying the national name.
If Lin gave careful thought to using his status as an Examination Yuan member to promote Taiwan independence, instead of giving up substance for form, he could come up with new names describing useful content.
He could do this by changing the names of the "national history and geography," "national cultural history" and "outline of national literature" tests and expanding their scope. Taiwan independence also requires supporting measures.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations