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
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
In 2009, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) made a welcome move to offer in-house contracts to all outsourced employees. It was a step forward for labor relations and the enterprise facing long-standing issues around outsourcing. TSMC founder Morris Chang (張忠謀) once said: “Anything that goes against basic values and principles must be reformed regardless of the cost — on this, there can be no compromise.” The quote is a testament to a core belief of the company’s culture: Injustices must be faced head-on and set right. If TSMC can be clear on its convictions, then should the Ministry of Education
The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) provided several reasons for military drills it conducted in five zones around Taiwan on Monday and yesterday. The first was as a warning to “Taiwanese independence forces” to cease and desist. This is a consistent line from the Chinese authorities. The second was that the drills were aimed at “deterrence” of outside military intervention. Monday’s announcement of the drills was the first time that Beijing has publicly used the second reason for conducting such drills. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership is clearly rattled by “external forces” apparently consolidating around an intention to intervene. The targets of