As the nation marks one year since President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) took office, plenty of commentators have been voicing their opinions.
The main concern for most ordinary people are cross-strait relations, economic development, the rights and duties of workers and employers (especially the recently instituted system of “one fixed day off and one flexible rest day” each week), Taiwan’s participation in international organizations and activities, such as the World Health Assembly, interactions between the ruling party and civic groups, pension reform and the Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program.
Perceived U-turns on the way policies were presented before Tsai took office and the way they have been implemented since have pushed the president’s opinion poll ratings down. In such circumstances, could it be that examining Tsai’s promotion of policies and affairs related to Aborigines would have a halo effect, in the same way that the moon can extend its hypnotic effect into the surrounding space?
Amis singer Panai Kusui and others have been camping on Ketagalan Boulevard near the Presidential Office Building to protest against the exclusion of privately owned land when delineating traditional Aboriginal territories, and they are calling on the minister of the Council of Indigenous Peoples to resign. However, it would not be fair to infer from this that the “halo effect” extends to Aboriginal affairs.
Examples of things Tsai has done might serve to prove the point. While many Taiwanese, including many officials, do not know why Tsai should apologize to Aborigines, she was nonetheless willing to make an apology that few heads of state anywhere in the world would be willing to make.
She has pledged to formulate legislation on Aboriginal autonomy and put it into practice. She has established the Indigenous Historical Justice and Transitional Justice Committee to handle issues of history, land, language, culture and reconciliation.
She has promised to investigate how, without the consent of Tao Aborigines, a decision was made to build a nuclear waste storage site on Orchid Island (Lanyu, 蘭嶼) despite the harmful effects of these toxic materials, which could last for thousands of years, and has promised compensation to residents.
She has responded to the demands of Pingpu Aborigines, including the Siraya, Makatao, Pazih and Papora, for their rightful names to be officially recognized, and has promised to restore their identity and rights. Her government has taken back the Broadcasting Corp of China’s frequencies so that they can be used by a dedicated Aboriginal radio station.
Her administration is drafting an indigenous language development law, and it is delineating and proclaiming traditional Aboriginal territories on government-owned land.
It is true that some of these items were considered and planned by previous governments, but it is fair to say that the announcements Tsai has made since taking office have lent them considerably more impetus.
Her official apology and her government’s policies of pursuing historical transitional justice, investigating the policy decision on nuclear waste storage, restoring Pingpu titles, reserving a popular radio frequency for an Aboriginal radio station and so on have shaken up the government’s habitual mindset and ways of responding.
It is neither possible nor necessary for the president to intervene in every detail; it is enough for her to set the general course.
As to the issue of delineating traditional lands, which is a topic of great concern to the Aboriginal community, it should indeed be handled at a higher level of legal procedure.
The government should convene public hearings and explanatory meetings on the issue and not proceed with legislation until Aborigines fully understand what it is about, but the president does not need to handle it herself.
However, she has clearly stated that traditional Aboriginal lands existed before the state and that they are therefore unbroken, no matter whether they are owned by private entities or government.
Regrettably, the protesters camping on Ketagalan Boulevard have not shifted their battleground to somewhere more effective.
With regard to the private individuals, corporations and government departments that are the main occupiers of traditional Aboriginal territory, to engage in substantive discourse on historical transitional justice and investigate the original ownership of the land, it would be more effective to “march separately, but strike together” with the Indigenous Justice Committee — a body that does have a grounding in public opinion.
There are two main obstacles to Aboriginal land rights. One is the mindset and standards of government agencies, and the other is corporations and private individuals who occupy traditional Aboriginal lands.
In a democratic environment, government agencies have to do whatever the president says, but private individuals and corporations are sure to resist because they want to hold on to their property.
It would be no easy task for Aborigines to gather privately owned land and turn it into traditional land. The home truths spoken by one minister without portfolio and others reveal where the crux of structural hegemony lies in Taiwanese society.
Tsai has a sincere attitude toward Aborigines and she has promised and wants to do more. This might have something to do with her background.
Aborigines are finally dealing with a head of state who wants to solve problems, so the most important thing is to take advantage of this situation while it is available. Rather than waiting for the next, better policy or environment, it would be better to cherish the moment and work together for a breakthrough.
Pasuya Poiconu is a former deputy minister of the Council of Indigenous Peoples.
Translated by Julian Clegg
The world has become less predictable, less rules-based, and more shaped by the impulses of strongmen and short-term dealmaking. Nowhere is this more consequential than in East Asia, where the fate of democratic Taiwan hinges on how global powers manage — or mismanage — tensions with an increasingly assertive China. The return of Donald Trump to the White House has deepened the global uncertainty, with his erratic, highly personalized foreign-policy approach unsettling allies and adversaries alike. Trump appears to treat foreign policy like a reality show. Yet, paradoxically, the global unpredictability may offer Taiwan unexpected deterrence. For China, the risk of provoking the
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on
RSS