On Nov. 12, the birthday of "founding father" Sun Yat-sen (孫中山), some people closely attached to the pan-blue camp, after paying their respects at the Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall, laid portraits of Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng (杜正勝) and Exam-ination Yuan member Lin Yu-ti (林玉体) on the ground and pelted them with eggs.
On the same day, a bomb was placed near the Ministry of Education, and an old soldier cut his throat in protest over the recent dispute about ending Sun's status as "founding father."
Lin and Tu's irresponsibly voiced proposals to remove questions about China's history and geography from the entry-level national civil service examinations and to modify senior high-school history materials to separate the history of Taiwan from that of China have sparked a conflagration in the pan-blue camp and made high-ranking pan-green officials anxious.
In political reality, Taiwan and China are two hostile powers, but unlike most enemies, this is because China regards Taiwan as part of its territory, a status Tai-wan rejects. In this situation, talking about sovereignty or cultural independence in Taiwan is inevitable, especially as the government elected by its people has sufficient power to govern itself, whereas China has no jurisdiction over Taiwan at all.
China's belief that talk in Taiwan of sovereignty and cultural independence is a slippery slope to independence is used as its rationale to criticize and threaten Taiwan.
That Taiwan is a sovereign and independent state is a fact, and that its culture has its developmental uniqueness is also widely recognized. But Taiwan has been profoundly influenced by Chinese culture. Pro-independence people, and indeed all Taiwanese, read Chinese, speak Chinese, eat Chinese food and may also take Chinese traditional medicine.
Cultural and political independence should be dealt with separately, but given an inability to demand political indepen-dence, some people instead make a big fuss over cultural independence. Superficially, this might seem to be aiding Taiwan independence, but in reality, it makes the whole situation worse.
If you say that the nation's "founding father" is a foreigner, would you also regard Minister of Justice Chen Ding-nan, (
And what about deities such as Matzu, Kuankung (the god of war) and even the Jade Emperor himself? Are they from the enemy camp as well?
As for the issue of the civil service exams, since these are national tests, there certainly is a question over the proportion of Chinese and Taiwanese history and geography included, for this relates directly to a country's sovereignty and independence. Since Taiwan is not capable of ruling China, Chinese history and geography should not be associated with our nation.
There was a compromise proposal to remove history and geography from the examination, but some pro-independence Examination Yuan members still insist on a Taiwan nation and argue that therefore national history and geography examinations should not be abolished.
Every country's educational system should give its students knowledge of their country, and textbooks should reinforce national consciousness. But Taiwan independence is still not yet a fact, and there are still major obstacles to independence.
Strongly emphasizing independence might go beyond political reality and might not only be difficult to implement, but cause controversy or lead to disaster.
While the political conflict among different ethnic groups has been aggravated since the presidential election earlier this year, the controversies brought by Tu and Lin have exacerbated the situation. That the words of an Examination Yuan member and a minister were able to cause such a ruckus suggests that there are major problems in the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) policy-making.
Not only did the DPP not plan ahead but it lacked a clear policy; consequently, the party did not know how to handle the situation.
Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
President Chen Shui-bian (
What is more troublesome is that reckless statements about independence often lead to controversies, even as our enemy on the other side of the Taiwan Strait watches covetously.
These pro-independence people have valor but lack strategy. The ruling party still lacks both solutions and a strategy. This is the greatest crisis of our nation's politics today.
Chiu Hei-yuan is a researcher in the Sun Yat-sen Institute for Social Sciences and Philosophy at Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Saturday is the day of the first batch of recall votes primarily targeting lawmakers of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The scale of the recall drive far outstrips the expectations from when the idea was mooted in January by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘). The mass recall effort is reminiscent of the Sunflower movement protests against the then-KMT government’s non-transparent attempts to push through a controversial cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014. That movement, initiated by students, civic groups and non-governmental organizations, included student-led protesters occupying the main legislative chamber for three weeks. The two movements are linked
RSS