President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), in her capacity as the head of state, issued an apology to Taiwan’s Aborigines, thus fulfilling the first of her election campaign pledges regarding Aboriginal affairs.
In her apology speech, Tsai said that by Nov. 1, the government would begin to delineate and publicly announce lands that traditionally belonged to Aboriginal peoples.
Tsai’s promise goes some way toward fulfilling her campaign pledge to restore Aboriginal land rights.
Simply demarcating territory and making public announcements will not be enough to restore Aborigines’ rights over their traditional lands. However, the demand raised by many Aborigines for the return of all the land that traditionally belongs to them will be extremely difficult to fulfill and will give rise to a large number of disputes.
For this reason, it would be preferable for the government to start out by restoring the original names of places inside traditional Aboriginal territories. Restoring the proper names would have the effect of returning the cultural significance of the traditional lands to their original owners. This can be done as a first step and discussions about the substantial return of land can be held later on.
Over the past four centuries, Taiwan’s Aborigines have not just had their living environments and natural resources seized from them; the sentiments, culture, history and spirituality attached to these lands have also been taken away. Their ancestral lands have become forestry areas and their sacred places have been turned into tourist areas and beach resorts.
Aborigines’ traditional lands form the backbone of their culture and emotions. Therefore, the return of traditional lands is not just about the return of tangible earth and soil, but is also about the return of something intangible: a people’s spirituality and culture. When returning traditional lands, the government should not neglect Aborigines’ right to interpret these spaces and name them as they wish.
Aborigines traditionally build a sense of spatial awareness through the naming of land, which forms a connection between space and society. Traditional land is steeped in Aboriginal culture and beliefs. It is also the resting place of their ancestors stretching back hundreds and thousands of years. All of this history and culture is expressed in the names Aborigines gave to their land. Traditional names include references to spirits, myths and legends, as well as wisdom about the mountains and forests.
For example, the name of Davalan (達瓦蘭) in Pingtung County’s Sandimen Township (三地門) means “the place where men were made.” This is the place where, according to legend, the Paiwan people were created. Abandoning traditional place names such as this has the effect of cutting Aboriginal people off from the foundations upon which their emotions and identities rest.
Following centuries of rule by various colonial powers, the culture of Taiwan’s Aboriginal peoples has already been uprooted. Their living environment has been snatched away from them and the original names of many places in their traditional lands have long since disappeared.
Through the framework of transitional justice, the return of traditional land rights must not be confined to property and natural resources alone. Traditional Aboriginal land names must also be restored; only then will it be possible to genuinely return land rights to the Aboriginal peoples of Taiwan.
Chen Chia-lin is deputy director of public relations for the Taiwan Solidarity Union.
Translated by Edward Jones
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past