Today is the 54th Retrocession Day. This used to be an occasion when Taiwanese were supposed to celebrate their return from 50 years of Japanese colonial rule to an indefinitely long period of mainland Chinese colonial rule. Hardly something to wave flags about, unless you are forced to, that is.
It is not that following Taiwan's return to the Republic of China, the island was first raped, then terrorized and finally occupied by a colonial regime far more intolerant of the Taiwanese than the Japanese had ever been, though this is of course, the essence of the island's melancholy history for the first 40 years after the end of WWII.
The real matter to ponder is that Retrocession Day is itself a lie, but until it is clearly known as such the folly of modern Taiwan paying homage to the shibboleths of its occupiers will continue and the ambiguity and ambivalence about who and what they are that defines Taiwanese identity -- much to the detriment of the island's security -- is likely to continue.
The lie of retrocession is that Taiwan was returned to mother China. The truth is that following Japan's unconditional surrender, the lands it occupied had to be run by someone. The Allies, to whom Japan had surrendered, decided that it was easier to let China run the place rather than for the Americans to do it -- though this was also a considered option. And that is what brought the KMT to Taiwan.
Forget the Cairo Declaration or the Potsdam Proclamation, which said that the Allies would give Taiwan back to China after beating Japan. This was supposed to happen when the claims of the war were settled, as they eventually were, by the Treaty of San Francisco in 1951. The only problem was that while Japan formally renounced sovereignty over Taiwan in the treaty, it was not given to either of the, by then, two claimants to be the real Chinese government. And so it has remained ever since.
What, therefore, should Retrocession Day mean to us? Maybe it should remind us that Taiwan has always been a pawn to be sacrificed for the sake of great power expediency, be it Imperial China giving it to Japan or the US tossing it to Chiang Kai-shek (
A strange interpretation of `ethical'
George Orwell's remark that hypocrisy was the besetting sin of the English has been amply demonstrated in the past few days by the the Blair government. We recall, even if Tony Blair or his foreign secretary Robin Cook have deemed it convenient to forget, that one of the hallmarks of the incoming Labour government was to have an "ethical" foreign policy. Even at the time, most British believed that ethics to the adulterous Cook was a county in southeast England. In the last few days we have seen the proselytizers of this "ethical foreign policy" toadying to Jiang Zemin (
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
RSS