Hau comments are offensive
I find some of former premier Hau Pei-Tsun’s (郝柏村) remarks quite interesting (“Ethnic discrimination seen in KMT attacks, Nov. 21, page 3). I did not say: “good.” I said interesting. He says that the Taiwanese were “loyal subjects of the Japanese emperor.” Well, Hau, just what were the Taiwanese to do?
Their island, Ilha de Formosa, was given to Japan by China as a result of losing a war. Taiwan was a Japanese colony until 1945 and after 1945 it became what amounts to a colony of the Republic of China (ROC). After the war, the Taiwanese did not “invite” the ROC to move to Taiwan. The ROC forced itself upon them.
It does seem odd to me that retired Taiwanese military officers are permitted to move to the mainland, a sworn enemy, and continue to draw their pensions. I know that in the US, we would not be allowed to do the same in certain countries.
As for these officers actually “returning home,” maybe Taiwan should just simply cut its losses and allow them to go without any compensation. Those who possess certain classified information can and should be withheld from departure to an aggressor nation. Yes, this is still permitted in a democracy. This is guarding “state secrets” and should be covered by a state secrets act.
Of course, I understand why Hau would much prefer that people cease discussing, or even thinking about, the 228 Incident. How better to forget who was responsible for it?
This is a great diversion tactic and his light-handed approach to how many people were killed or “disappeared” I think is insulting. How many of his family members went out and never returned? Was his village bombed or pillaged by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) soldiers? Of course not.
Hau, like many others, tends to marginalize those Taiwanese who had to live through the first colonial period under the Japanese and then the “colonization” and abuse by the KMT.
However, I commend the students at Sun Yat-sen University for putting hard and pointed questions to him (“Ex-premier faces protests in Greater Kaohsiung, Dec. 9, page 3). This is about the real history of Taiwan and its people. Revisionist history just will not do.
On Sept. 27, 2002, the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (East Timor) joined the UN to become its 191st member. Since then, two other nations have joined, Montenegro on June 28, 2006, and South Sudan on July 14, 2011. The combined total of the populations of these three nations is just more than half that of Taiwan’s 23.7 million people. East Timor has 1.3 million, Montenegro has slightly more than half a million and South Sudan has 10.9 million. They all are members of the UN, yet much more populous Taiwan is denied membership. Of the three, East Timor, as a Southeast Asian
Taiwan’s status in the world community is experiencing something really different; it’s being treated like a normal country. And not just a “normal” country, more like a valuable, constructive, democratic and generous country. This is not simply an artifact of Taiwan’s successes in combatting the novel coronavirus. It is a new attitude, weighing Taiwan’s democracy against China’s lack of it. Before I continue, I should apologize to the readers of the Taipei Times. I have not visited Taipei since the opening of the American Institute in Taiwan’s new chancery building in Neihu last year, so I was unprepared for the photograph
At a June 12 news conference held by the Talent Circulation Alliance to announce the release of its white paper for this year, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) emphasized that, in this era of globalization, Taiwan should focus on improving foreign language and digital abilities when cultivating talent, so that it stands out from global competitors. I suggest the government should consider building a professional translation industry. If the public believes that there is a relationship between learning English and national competitiveness, then the nation must consider the social cost of language education. This should be assessed to maximise educational effectiveness: Is
Taiwan has for decades singlehandedly borne the brunt of a revanchist, ultra-nationalist China — until now. Ever since Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison had the temerity to call for a transparent, international investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been turning the screws on Canberra. This has included unleashing aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomats to intimidate Australian policymakers, enacting punitive tariffs on its exports, and threatening an embargo on Chinese tourists and students to the nation. A tense situation became more serious on June 19 after Morrison revealed that a “sophisticated state-based actor” — read: China — had launched a