The Past month has seen vigorous development in student-led social movements in Taiwan and Hong Kong. In Hong Kong, 15-year-old high-school student Joshua Wong (黃之鋒) organized the Scholarism movement as a protest against the government’s forceful promotion of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its attempts to make the CCP look good. The government is doing this through the education system, ignoring the June 4 movement and other major historical incidents. In Taiwan, an anti-media monopoly alliance organized by National Taiwan University Student Lin Fei-fan (林飛帆), National Tsing Hwa University student Chen Wei-ting (陳為廷) and National Cheng Kung University student Chang Chih-ling (張芷菱) are organizing continuous protest activities against the Want Want China Times Group. Having gained support from all sectors of society, on Sept. 1 they mobilized almost 10,000 people in a street demonstration.
These two movements have appeared at approximately the same time and both are in effect taking aim at the same target. Hong Kong’s educational policies are directed by Beijing from behind the scenes, while the Taiwanese students’ warning to the Want Want China Times group is in fact also a warning about possible future events as the China factor is entering Taiwan.
In other words, it is the China — or, rather, the CCP — factor that has set off these movements. The similarity in timing and target is no coincidence. It reflects the clash between and opposition to one model of social development represented by the CCP and another represented by the civil societies in Taiwan and Hong Kong.
The social development model represented by the CCP can be called “the Chinese model”: it focuses on economic development and suppresses everything else, expanding economic strength by sacrificing democracy and freedom. The social development model for civil society in Hong Kong and Taiwan, on the other hand, makes public dignity and freedom, social justice and tolerance the goal of economic development. The definition of “happiness” is very different in these two models.
This year marks the 15th anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to China. The difference this year is that Hong Kong has expressed its strongest discontent with China since 2003 and surveys in Hong Kong show the lowest numbers ever of people identifying as Chinese.
In Taiwan’s presidential election in January, China openly interfered via Taiwanese businesspeople in China and pro-Chinese media outlets. Taiwan is already showing signs of developing in the same direction as Hong Kong. Everyone is feeling these changes, and both Hong Kong and Taiwan are becoming increasingly affected by restrictions imposed by China. This is making the clash between the two models increasingly obvious.
One of the reasons for this is that the “one country, two systems” for Hong Kong in effect has been abandoned. The CCP is in a rush to thoroughly integrate Hong Kong with China and is deliberately tying it closer to the mainland. In Taiwan, the cross-strait peace policy pursued by President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration is bringing China and Taiwan ever closer to each other. However, precisely because Hong Kong and Taiwan are moving closer to China, their civil societies are now able to see through the Chinese model and the heavy price Chinese society has to pay for China’s rapid economic development. I call this phenomenon “increased alienation through increased proximity.” This is the fundamental reason why social movements opposed to the CCP factor have arisen almost simultaneously in Taiwan and Hong Kong.
Wang Dan is a visiting associate professor at National Tsing Hua University’s College of Humanities and Social Sciences.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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