Chiang Kai-shek (
So what possible justification could there be for a democratic state to "honor" his memory by keeping statues of him on military bases?
Since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lost power in 2000, there have been many instances in which pan-blue diehards have demonstrated their desire to brush aside the legal requirements of a democratic state in an effort to re-establish totalitarian control of Taiwan.
This attitude was especially evident after the 2004 presidential election. At the time, rumors abounded that a coup d'etat had been attempted by pan-blue fanatics, but had quickly fizzled out because of the good sense of most military and political leaders.
Later came such travesties as the attacks on government buildings by mobs led by pan-blue legislators, demands for unconstitutional "compromises," and the establishment of the extra-legal "March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee" designed to prove whatever former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
However, in a democracy trust is something that political leaders must work to establish. They are not entitled to it. So when members of the KMT respond to criticism of their party's inglorious, authoritarian past with the kind of visceral rhetoric they employed this week, many Taiwanese become deeply afraid of what will happen should the KMT return to power.
We've had to suffer through Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (
Perhaps Ma would be better off investing some time in establishing his national leadership credentials by demonstrating that he is unafraid to stare down the revisionist reactionaries in his own party, before he gallivants about the globe giving civics lessons to the Chinese Communist Party.
He could start by endorsing the de-politicization of the one institution that can make or break Taiwan's democratization: the military. It is absurd to maintain that "for historical reasons" it is desirable for the military to retain the trappings and symbolism of a one-party state. It is vital to show that the institutions of the state belong to the state's ultimate sovereigns -- not any political party, but the people of Taiwan.
Removing the statues of the "Generalissimo" from all public localities is desirable and necessary to dismantle the totalitarian cult of personality that befits only crackpot regimes like North Korea.
Jonathan Fenby wrote in his biography of Chiang, Chiang Kai-shek: China's Generalissimo and the Nation He Lost, "The Cold War made an objective assessment of Chiang almost impossible as the past was viewed through the lens of what followed."
"Either he was a faithful friend of the West who had been undone by Communist cunning, Western irresolution and treachery in the State Department; or he was a reactionary, cruel, incompetent dictator who was no better than the warlords, who betrayed the true interests of his nation by failing to stand up to the Japanese in time, and who perverted the sacred teachings of Sun Yat-sen (
Taiwan is no longer bound by the intolerant fetterings of the fight against the "Communist bandits," which was used to justify much evil during Chiang's day. It is time to look with clear eyes at Taiwan's past, as well as that of the KMT.
Chiang is no democratic icon. Take the statues down.
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
Despite calls to the contrary from their respective powerful neighbors, Taiwan and Somaliland continue to expand their relationship, endowing it with important new prospects. Fitting into this bigger picture is the historic Coast Guard Cooperation Agreement signed last month. The common goal is to move the already strong bilateral relationship toward operational cooperation, with significant and tangible mutual benefits to be observed. Essentially, the new agreement commits the parties to a course of conduct that is expressed in three fundamental activities: cooperation, intelligence sharing and technology transfer. This reflects the desire — shared by both nations — to achieve strategic results within
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
RSS