Former Presidential Office secretary-general Chen Shih-meng (
Kudos to Chen, as it is about time some people came forward to point out the absurdity of allowing politicians to take Mainlanders for granted.
In Taiwan, the term benshengren is generally used to describe people who came to Taiwan from China hundreds of years ago and their descendants, whereas the term waishengren (Mainlander) is used to describe people who came from China with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) after the Chinese civil war, and their offspring.
For a long time however, under the guise of looking out for their physical and material well-being with laws such as the Statute Governing Reconstruction of Old Military Dependents' Villages (
It is one thing for the party to treat Mainlanders as a voting bloc, but another to define their image by associating them with the KMT.
The notion was noticeably brazen in the recent fight over the changing of the inscription on the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall's main arch.
Many pan-blue politicians objected to the renaming of the plaza to "Liberty Square" with the installment of the Chinese characters ziyou guangchang (
It is understandable that these elderly veterans felt this way, as many of them came to Taiwan decades ago on the promise of dictator Chiang Kai-shek that one day he would lead them back to their homeland in China.
But certain pro-China news outlets are happy to promote the notion that Mainlanders are and should be against the removal of Chiang-related artifacts. It's as if Mainlanders are inherently opposed to democracy and adore dictators.
Mainlanders should not be automatically viewed as pro-China just as a benshengren should not automatically assumed to be pro-independence.
There can be no political assumptions made about Mainlanders or benshengren.
The real question is whether one identifies with Taiwan or China.
It is unwise for political parties to manipulate ethnic issues whenever election time rolls around. It is even more unwise for political parties to "kidnap" a certain ethnic group at election time to serve their own political ends.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS