During the last few years of Japan’s Tokugawa shogunate, before the Meiji Restoration of 1868, there were ambitious figures like Ryoma Sakamoto, Takamori Saigo and Toshimichi Okubo, who were determined to completely overturn the Tokugawa establishment. They recognized that it would be impossible to turn Japan into a modern nation if the existing establishment was preserved.
So, as soon as the Tokugawa regime was forced to give up its power, they set about radically transforming the machinery of government. Their everyday concern was which parts of the old establishment were still in place and how they could be abolished and replaced, rather than merely installing new faces at the top of the Tokugawa establishment.
This allowed Japan to break free of traditional Asian institutions and adopt European ways, rather than only making superficial changes.
Abandoning the Confucian imperial examination system, Japan was transformed into a European and US-style modern civilization.
From a country that could only forge samurai swords, it became one that could make modern machinery and guns. In just 26 years, Japan gained sufficient new strengths to launch the First Sino-Japanese War against China’s Qing Dynasty in 1894.
Even after suffering defeat in World War II, Japan quickly got back on its feet and became the only Asian member of the world’s seven major economies.
In comparison, more than 30 years have passed since the 1986 founding of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). During these three decades, are there any ways in which the DPP can be said to have thoroughly overturned the old establishment?
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) establishment, which has dominated Taiwan for seven decades, remains intact. Frankly speaking, the DPP and its supporters are full of ideas instilled by the KMT. They have failed to go beyond the established KMT-style ways of thinking.
One has to build a new bridge before demolishing an old one, and simply patching up the old bridge will achieve nothing.
Since President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) took office, she does not seem to have thought about setting up a new, parallel system that would allow the old KMT government establishment to gradually fade away.
National defense, for example, is still under the control of the Whampoa Military Academy, where the ideology is one of fighting for the Chinese nation rather than for the people and the land. Under such conditions, if no new bridge is built, Taiwan’s so-called defense will be for nothing.
Although the outstanding performance of Aborigines in the military is clear, Aboriginal officers have not been able to get into the core command structure. If a new bridge can be built — one that is dedicated to fighting for the people and the land — ways will be found to make the armed forces more cohesive.
Similarly, with regard to judicial reforms, the minister of justice’s mindset unconsciously concedes to the KMT’s system of legal values. How, then, can judicial reforms proceed?
The same is true of other Cabinet ministries and organs of public power. Since holding on to power is their main concern, their priority under treacherous international conditions is not to offend the powerful countries concerned. This leads to an excessively cautious approach, while opportunities to build new bridges are overlooked.
Building new bridges calls for parallel thinking, but the government is locked in a cycle in which officials call for reform, campaign hard to get elected, get into office, maintain the old system, then call for reform and so on.
Only by setting up a new establishment will it be possible to institute great reforms like those of the Meiji restoration.
Joshua Tin is an economist.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.