Aug. 15 just passed a few days ago. What is so special about that?
Aug. 15, 1945, was the day Japan surrendered, effectively ending World War II. In Japan, it marks the end of the war; South Korea calls it Liberation Day; and, in North Korea, it is called Liberation of Fatherland Day.
Taiwan, which was also colonized by Japan, did not develop a historical understanding of the date as marking the end of the war until the 1990s, when former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was mayor of Taipei. Prior to that, the event was seen through the blurry Chinese lens of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which conflated it with China’s War of Resistance Against Japan. In the KMT’s and the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) China, Sept. 3 marks the day of victory over Japan. In Taiwan, it is called Armed Forces Day.
Calling it “armistice day” would be in line with Japan’s view, but it is also a neutral term as far as Taiwan is concerned. If Taiwan has its own subjective identity, if it is a country, then it should follow the example of Seoul and Pyongyang. Following the Japanese or Chinese definition— whether it be the definition of KMT/Nationalist China or CCP/Communist China — just shows how confused Taiwan is about its history.
The time between Aug. 15 and Oct. 25, 1945 was a period of confusion during which Taiwan descended from liberation into subjugation. Taiwan, which lacked its own national identity, was enveloped in the confusion surrounding the motherland. Korea, which was colonized by Japan from 1910 and 1945, had left and right-wing movements.
Former South Korea president Syngman Rhee and North Korean founder Kim Il-sung asked the KMT and the CCP for help, and although Korea split into North and South, the two remain independent countries.
What about Taiwan? Among idealistic Taiwanese who felt that China was the motherland turned to either the KMT or the CCP, with the result that Taiwan was thrown into a struggle between the two parties, a struggle that remains unsettled.
Taiwanese who welcomed the motherland were liberated on Aug. 15, 1945, only to fall under someone else’s control again on Oct. 25 the same year, when the Nationalist army came to Taiwan to accept the Japanese surrender on behalf of the Allies and proceeded to occupy Taiwan.
Following the 228 Incident in 1947, the government saw an opportunity to eliminate Taiwanese intellectuals and cultural personalities to strengthen its hold on power. In 1949, the KMT was thrown out of China by the CCP, and this was followed in Taiwan by the White Terror era and one of the world’s longest periods of martial law, all to consolidate the KMT’s hold on power.
The KMT, which managed to survive thanks to its resistance to the CCP, later reacted to the move toward democracy by joining hands with China in trying to suppress Taiwan, temporarily extending its failing existence. Taiwan, still lacking a national identity, continues to search for a way forward.
Aug. 15, 1945, was a day of liberation and independence for many former colonies around the world. These new countries have had their ups and downs, but they have been trying to find a way forward as countries with their own national identity.
If Taiwan on Aug. 15, 1945, had chosen to join the ranks of newly independent states, we would not have the current Chinese problem. Although there would have been opposition between the left and the right, as an independent country, Taiwan would not be trapped between KMT and CCP China. Instead, we would probably have had our own politics, economy and culture. We must not repeat the mistakes of history, and all of us who live in Taiwan today must be aware of our past history.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Taiwan has lost Trump. Or so a former State Department official and lobbyist would have us believe. Writing for online outlet Domino Theory in an article titled “How Taiwan lost Trump,” Christian Whiton provides a litany of reasons that the William Lai (賴清德) and Donald Trump administrations have supposedly fallen out — and it’s all Lai’s fault. Although many of Whiton’s claims are misleading or ill-informed, the article is helpfully, if unintentionally, revealing of a key aspect of the MAGA worldview. Whiton complains of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s “inability to understand and relate to the New Right in America.” Many
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
Taiwan is to hold a referendum on Saturday next week to decide whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, which was shut down in May after 40 years of service, should restart operations for as long as another 20 years. The referendum was proposed by the opposition Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and passed in the legislature with support from the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Its question reads: “Do you agree that the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should continue operations upon approval by the competent authority and confirmation that there are no safety concerns?” Supporters of the proposal argue that nuclear power
RSS