As a visiting lecturer at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Taiwan History, I have learned a few things about the kinds of courses available at history departments and research institutes in Taiwan. One thing I find astonishing is that, among courses offered for either undergraduates or graduate students, one can hardly find any with titles like “History of the People’s Republic of China [PRC]” or “China since 1949.”
Chengchi’s Institute of International Relations used to do research on the “bandits,” as the Chinese Communist Party and government were called in those days, but this research was limited by the prevailing ideology of the time, and there is no such department anymore.
Even Taiwan’s top research establishment, Academia Sinica, has no department devoted to PRC research.
Chinese history since the 1949 revolution comes under the Institute of Modern History, and as far as I know there aren’t many people researching it. Among universities and institutes that have China research departments, few offer complete courses on PRC history.
I have three reasons for calling this situation astonishing.
First, I studied in the US for 10 years, and also did some research in the UK, so I know that almost every university in Western countries has courses and research on East Asia, or courses on Chinese history that extend beyond 1949.
Now, with the PRC’s “non-peaceful” rise, countries around the world are paying ever-greater attention to understanding China, and modern Chinese history is a popular course to take.
Taiwan’s educational and academic institutions have always taken Europe and the US as their models, so why do they make an exception by overlooking this trend?
Second, following Taiwan’s second transfer of power, cross-strait relations are moving toward concrete and close exchanges. China’s influence over Taiwan is strengthening.
Looking to the future, no matter whether power again changes hands and no matter how greatly the views of Taiwanese on cross-strait relations diverge, China is a presence that cannot be ignored.
When dealing with such a powerful rival, Taiwan cannot afford to be ignorant of its history. As they say, know your opponent as you know yourself.
Of all countries, Taiwan in particular needs to have a deep understanding of the course China has followed over the past 60 years. The need is there, but the education system has not caught up, and that’s a pity.
Third, while there is actually plenty of information about China available in Taiwan these days, especially in the media, I have noticed a trend among some news outlets to tread carefully in their reporting in deference to China’s might.
The picture of China presented by Taiwanese media is rather incomplete. China’s history since 1949 is rarely touched upon. As a result, young people in Taiwan hardly understand anything about China.
Many students in my classes have told me that they chose my course because they want to know more about Chinese history since 1949, so such a demand does exist among students.
If we want to get a real understanding of China, we cannot allow the media, pressured as they are by their practical interests, to mislead the public. It is important to give our students a thorough and carefully analyzed foundation in the PRC’s history.
Wang Dan is a visiting associate professor at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Taiwan History and a prominent figure in China’s democracy movement.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS