Independent Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) unique, populist style — known in local political circles as the “Ko phenomenon”— is still very much in the ascendancy, with many of his remarks having been conferred the status of “Ko-isms.” His tone is usually witty and humorous, and his ideas on governance and political tactics are very much his own individual style. Furthermore, Ko has a track record of wading into sensitive subjects and making alarming statements.
Ko’s comments in US magazine Foreign Policy have attracted a great deal of debate in Taiwan. When asked about culture, Ko cited the experience of the four Chinese-speaking regions — Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong and China — saying that, “the longer the colonization, the more advanced a place is. It’s rather embarrassing. Singapore is better than Hong Kong; Hong Kong is better than Taiwan; Taiwan is better than the [Chinese] mainland.”
The phrase “the longer the colonization, the more advanced a place is” touches upon different ideological interpretations of history prevalent in Taiwanese society. Critics say this is tantamount to extolling the virtues of imperialist colonial policies, while others believe the colonial experience, though painful, brought benefits of modernization.
Taiwan experienced 50 years of colonization at the hands of Japan, while the Hong Kong colonial experience under British rule lasted for more than 150 years. Japan’s rule over Taiwan — especially the later period — successfully established a foundation for the modernization of Taiwan; the effects of which are still felt to this day. Even the ruling Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), to a greater or lesser degree, recognizes this fact.
British rule left Hong Kong with a comparatively robust legal system and a financial system well-integrated into the international economy, in addition to a free press and free speech. Compared with today’s China, in these areas Hong Kong is still much more advanced: This is an incontrovertible fact. Indeed, the unequal distribution of power between the colonizer and the colonized is an intrinsic deficiency of colonialism that should not be skirted over.
Taiwan and Hong Kong have shared a remarkably similar fate over recent decades. They — unlike most other former colonies — did not gain independence following relinquishment by their former colonial powers. Instead, they were “returned” — or in the case of Taiwan, “retroceded” — to the “motherland” China, with power simply changing hands. In contrast to other former colonies, in Taiwan and Hong Kong there have been no social movements to reflect upon the history of the colonial period. Instead, the new holders of power have blandly asked their citizens to “love their country.”
This is because the premise for any reflection on the unequal distribution of power under colonialism would undoubtedly be that the people in the post-colonial era are masters of their own destiny. Following several decades of struggle, the Taiwanese are certainly already masters of their own destiny. On the other hand, Hong Kong, whose colonial period lasted far longer than Taiwan’s, is at present still negotiating the thorny, hazardous path to democracy.
Many treatises published by the Hong Kong Federation of Students — organizers of the Umbrella movement — have been based upon critiques of “old” and “new” colonialism; which explains why they have not been accepted by the present governing authorities. How should we contrast and reflect upon the differences between “old” and “new” colonial rule? Living in this so-called “post-colonial” age, this is a task that requires serious attention.
John Lim is an associate research fellow at the Institute of Modern History at Academia Sinica.
Translated by Edward Jones
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS