For the Aborigines that have lived in Taiwan for thousands of years, the celebrations for the Republic of China’s (ROC) 100th anniversary are entirely meaningless.
When the ROC was founded in China 100 years ago, the Aborigines in Taiwan were still at the beginning stages of a five-decades-long Japanese colonial rule. The Xinhai Revolution that was taking place in China across the Taiwan Strait in 1911 had absolutely no connection whatsoever with Aborigines in Taiwan.
It was not until the Japanese were defeated at the end of World War II and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) took over Taiwan that Taiwan’s Aborigines, for the first time, came into contact with the ROC. As far as the Aborigines were concerned, the ROC government was just one more colonizer forcing them to accept colonial rule, and this is precisely why some Aboriginal groups are currently staging protests to oppose the centennial celebrations, in the same way Native Americans protest the celebration of Columbus Day in mainstream US society.
However, there are also a lot of official government-sanctioned Aboriginal events to “celebrate” the ROC’s centennial. Some of these events are huge opera productions, music and dance performances, history exhibits, academic conferences and concerts — all of which basically boil down to the colonized helping the colonizer celebrate their nation’s centennial. It makes one wonder how on earth this could happen.
In his celebrated book Imagined Communities, Benedict Anderson mentions something that hits home for us in Taiwan. In 1913, when the Dutch were celebrating the 100th anniversary of their independence from French rule, the Dutch colonial government organized centennial celebrations in Batavia — present day Jakarta — the capital of the Dutch East Indies. In doing so, they required the colonized people there to participate in their celebrations and provide manpower and resources.
In an article with the title “If I were a Netherlander” that an Indonesian nationalist named Suwardi Suryaningrat published in a local newspaper, one part stood out from the rest: “If I were a Netherlander, I would not celebrate the commemoration of independence in a country where we refuse to give people their freedom.”
Now, almost 100 years later, it is just as absurd that the Aborigines of Taiwan continue to be invited to celebrate the ROC’s centennial by a colonial government and a president who says that he “treat[s] Aborigines as human beings.”
If the ROC regime on Taiwan truly adheres to their Constitution, and the nation really is as culturally diverse as it claims, then the best way to celebrate its centennial would be to start by offering a sincere apology for its mistakes, for stealing land from Aborigines and for forcing them to assimilate, which amounts to a long line of destructive colonial policies on its part. It should also work to help restore traditional Aboriginal land as well as Aboriginal languages, cultures and dignity.
Chi Chun-chieh is a professor at National Dong Hwa University’s Institute of Ethnic Relations.
Translated by Kyle Jeffcoat
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS