The results of the nine-in-one local elections will be out on Saturday, but what is more important is not which candidates win — rather it is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) tricks to trigger ethnic tensions that are most worrisome.
During the past few weeks, many non-KMT candidates, such as independent Taipei mayoral candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) and the Democratic Progressive Party’s Greater Taichung mayoral candidate, Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍), have been presenting policy platforms and their visions for the city in which they are running for mayor; meanwhile, the KMT has been fanning ethnic tensions.
First, it was incumbent KMT Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (胡志強) who said that if he loses the election, the Republic of China (ROC) would collapse. Then it was former premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村) saying that if KMT Taipei mayoral candidate Sean Lien (連勝文) loses, the ROC would be gone. Finally, Sean Lien’s father, former vice president Lien Chan (連戰), said that the only way to defend the KMT and the ROC is to have his son elected mayor of Taipei.
Certainly, the majority of voters do not believe that the ROC would collapse if a certain candidate or candidates lose, but such statements may be appealing to those who followed the KMT regime to Taiwan after losing the war against the Chinese Communist Party, as well as some of their descendants.
Lien Chan and Hau went on to accuse Ko of being the descendant of Japanese imperial officials, as Ko’s father and grandfather were born during the Japanese colonial period and educated under the Japanese colonial school system. Ko’s grandfather served as an elementary-school teacher during the Japanese colonial period.
Both Lien Chan and Hau said that a person of such lineage is not suitable to be the mayor of the capital.
The unspoken message is clear: Since 90 percent of the population are those whose families have lived in Taiwan since before the KMT regime took power in 1945, most of them have family members who were educated in the Japanese colonial school system and even served in certain public positions. Therefore, only Mainlanders who came to Taiwan with the KMT after 1945, or their descendants, are suitable candidates to become the mayor of Taipei.
On Saturday, Sean Lien himself said during a rally that, if elected, he would change the name of the street in front of Taipei City Hall from Shifu Road (市府路) — literarily “City Hall Road” — to “Jingguo Road” (經國路) to commemorate the late authoritarian president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) for his “contributions to Taiwan.”
Obviously, the move is targeting senior KMT members and supporters, who are mostly Mainlanders, since they are more emotionally attached to Chiang.
It took decades, after tensions and conflicts, for the different ethnic groups in the country to be in the more harmonious relationship present today. Looking back at how horrible the conflicts were and how far we have traveled, it is absolutely regrettable that the KMT is agitating ethnic divisions for its own gain in the election. No matter who wins the election, the public will be the losers, as it may take some time for ethnic relations to recover after the election.
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
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
RSS