When Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) was sworn in last week, she said something insightful, although she might not have been aware of its effect or implications.
“Taiwan does not belong only to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), but to the entire population of the Republic of China (ROC),” she said.
She has it right if she means no party could claim to represent the nation.
Setting aside the nuance underlying Hung’s “ROC,” the nationals of the ROC are undeniably and exclusively those who are also referred to as Taiwanese and this being the case, why would Hung not agree to the proposition that Taiwan belongs to the Taiwanese and its fate should be determined by them? If she does, then she agrees with an essential part of what is generally called the DPP’s “Taiwanese independence” party platform.
On the other hand, it is curious that Hung uttered the remark in the first place, when the DPP, to our knowledge, has never claimed possession of Taiwan. Hung seems to be implying that the right to interpret or shape Taiwan’s “national identity” cannot be monopolized by the DPP.
Hung’s belief that the Taiwanese national identity has become what it is through DPP manipulation of the education system and “brainwashing” when it was in power is understandable, if we are familiar with Hung’s party and its history of authoritarian control of the national narrative and the information in school textbooks. After all, the KMT’s machinations were successful, and Taiwanese in the past prided themselves on being Chinese and had nostalgic and sentimental attachments to the “greatness” of China.
The fact is, the DPP administration was not the initiator of “Taiwanization.” The process started well before 2000, the year the DPP first won the presidency. If former president and KMT chairman Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) is someone who the party wishes to disavow, former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) certainly is not. Chiang was the one who foresaw the fate of the party if it failed to “localize” and proclaimed himself Taiwanese — and Chinese. His appointment of Lee as his successor was no doubt part of this drive toward localization.
It was democratization that pushed Chiang to finally lift Martial Law; it was democratization that necessitated the switch from inculcating myths to teaching what is true about this land and what happened to the people who live on it. If the DPP had failed to win power in 2000, the progression could have been slowed, but it would not have been reversed.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) on Tuesday — the anniversary of Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) death — referred to the toppling and defacing of the late dictator’s statues.
While it is OK to criticize Chiang Kai-shek, his contribution to Taiwan should not be negated, he said.
“Chiang [Kai-shek] and his deeds deserve a fair and rational appraisal,” he said, which is true.
However, that would first require a leveling of the playing field: The last thing a democratic country needs is statues in schools and an imposing memorial hall dedicated to an autocrat. Not to mention that the cost of maintaining the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall is financially subsidized by public money.
The KMT has a tradition of paying tribute to Chiang Kai-shek at his mausoleum in Taoyuan. The Chinese term used by the party — and knowingly or unknowingly by the public and the media — for this act is ye ling, which means paying homage to the burial place of an emperor or someone of that rank.
Maybe the party can start with dispensing with the term ye ling and make the first tiny step toward keeping up with a democratizing Taiwan.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with