When political ideologies are at the center of a debate on the preservation of a monument, a structure less than three decades old can carry the misleading status of a heritage site worthy of protection.
Such absurdity was in full display on Tuesday when the Taipei City Government's Department of Cultural Affairs announced that it would start the process of deciding whether or not the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall should have the protection afforded an historical site.
The abrupt announcement came soon after the Cabinet's decision that the hall would be renamed "Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall" and the white and blue walls surrounding it demolished.
The urgency of the statement shows the degree of political will the Taipei City Government can demonstrate when trying to protect a structure that was built in 1980.
Since the Cabinet announced its plan last Friday, the city government has left no law in its jurisdiction unturned to save the memorial and its environs. In order to guarantee that the hatchet man of the 228 Incident remains majestically enshrined, the Department of Cultural Affairs first cited the Construction Law (
If this law can be applied to a structure that is younger than Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, then why did the Taipei City Government insist upon tearing down the Jiancheng Circle (
And some sites on the city government's demolition list are older than that. The government has approved tearing down walls surrounding Talungtung's (
And it is chillingly ironic that the very day the city government made an announcement declaring the CKS Memorial Hall a temporary heritage site, the Department of Rapid Transit Systems issued a notice to the Lo Sheng Sanatorium (
Glancing at the list of enduring landmarks chosen to be destroyed by the city government, it's hard not to notice the stench of cultural prejudice in the air.
Cherry-picking history so that Chiang Kai-shek (
Meanwhile, the birth of democracy in this country remains substantially unmemorialized.
Lee Yong-ping (
If her argument is valid, would it then be acceptable for the Taipei City Government to preserve the walls while letting Chiang's symbolic credibility expire? Probably not.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS