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 few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed