"A case for Formosan DNA" (Letters, Dec. 30, page 8) is a sad case of a political agenda triumphing over science and reason.
Its source article reports that the research of Mackay Memorial Hospital's Mari Lin (林媽利) found that the DNA of 85 percent of Taiwanese Hoklo and Hakka speakers has "Aboriginal ancestry" ("Most Hoklo, Hakka have Aboriginal genes, study finds," Nov. 21, page 8).
In his letter, Professor Francis Lai has turned this around to mean something like "85 percent of these people's DNA is aboriginal." I say "something like" because I frankly don't understand what this "critical part of the genome" is that Lai refers to. In any case, saying something about 85 percent of the people and something about 85 percent of their genome are two completely different things.
The original report does not say what percentage of these subjects' DNA is the same as that of Taiwan's Aborigines; it only states that most of them showed evidence of Aboriginal ancestry. My own DNA would show evidence of Irish ancestry, but that certainly isn't the same as saying all or even most of my ancestors were Irish.
If the DNA of Hoklo and Hakka speakers were 85 percent Aboriginal, then the vast majority of Taiwanese would look nearly the same as the Aborigines. In fact, they look very much like the people across the Strait in Fujian and other places.
We may assume that much of the Aboriginal DNA found in these test subjects came from centuries of occasional intermarriage with Taiwanese Aborigines; however, evidence was also found for Vietnamese-related DNA. It is well-known that ancestors of today's Vietnamese lived thousands of years ago in the Fujian area. The Austronesian-speaking Aboriginal population of Taiwan may also have ultimately come from southern China; linguistic evidence is much stronger for a spread from Taiwan southward, not the opposite.
In this case, one may wonder whether these traces of Aboriginal DNA in the Hoklo/Hakka population might also be found among the southern Chinese people living across the Strait. There are plenty of recent immigrants from across the Strait that Lin could test to clear up this issue. I wrote to her last month with this suggestion, but received no reply.
Professor Lai's letter has some other strange notions: "the invasion of minority Mandarin speakers from 1945." As I understand Taiwanese history, most of these postwar immigrants were from Shanghai and other areas where Mandarin was not spoken. The switch to Mandarin was not a result of their influence but the political will of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石). These recent immigrants merely supplied the large force of unqualified Mandarin teachers whom the Taiwanese unfortunately had to learn from.
Lai's letter ends with "We, Formosans, are all Aborigines." When US president John F. Kennedy went to Berlin, he proclaimed, in incorrect German, "Ich bin ein Berliner" (I am a Berliner). His statement was 100 percent politics, zero percent science. The same goes for Lai's words.
Assoc. Prof. Jakob Dempsey
Department of Foreign Languages and Applied Linguistics
Yuan-ze University
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is