Return treasures to China
In his Taipei Times op-ed Chen Mao-Hsiung (陳茂雄) states that “legally and from the Taiwanese public’s subjective self-awareness, Taiwan is not a part of China” (“Taiwanese unwilling to identify as Chinese,” July 5, page 8).
Chen carefully argues for the truth of his assertion, finally stating that “Taiwanese and Chinese belong to two different worlds, and the majority of Taiwanese are unwilling to be Chinese. As for the few people who identify with China, they should be allowed to return to their motherland.”
Given Chen’s thoughtfully reasoned argument, it is important now for Taiwan to act courageously and substantively assert its independence from China, politically (“legally”), socially and culturally (“subjectively”).
However, such a move would be fraught with uncertainty over Beijing’s reaction.
The last thing anyone wants on either side of the Strait is for a shift to a state of war. Thus, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) must choose her options carefully, making sure the steps she takes not only pragmatically assert the truth of Chen’s argument, but also substantively express a peaceful, generous and open-handed resolution.
Therefore, the best way for Tsai to start the process would be for her to initiate a kind of sacrifice that lives up to Chen’s claim that “Taiwanese and Chinese belong to two different worlds.”
The best course of action then is for the president to encourage Taiwanese to return to Beijing the entire collection of Chinese artifacts in the National Palace Museum.
This would do what Chen implies should be done with those things that identify Taiwan with China: send them back to the motherland.
It would also show that Taiwanese and Chinese belong to two different worlds, that China does not own Taiwan and Taiwan does not own China.
Beijing should appreciate having all those artifacts back in the country from which they were stolen by a previous generation, albeit one that acted out of the best intentions to preserve them, which is why Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) brought all those treasures from China to Taiwan in the first place.
Now that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has succeeded in its costly preservation efforts, giving the treasures back to their rightful owners would demonstrate both a tremendous act of good faith and respect for the Chinese people, while reminding them of the culture that their government at one time sought to destroy.
At the same time, it would honor the legacy of the Republic of China (ROC) for having rendered this great service to the posterity of China.
Finally, the time has passed for Taiwan to become a country — New Taiwan is a better idea. Let China have the old Taiwan that was two-faced about its heritage and so-called historical connection to China.
New Taiwan would be an intercultural beacon with the old National Palace Museum serving as an international conservatory of the arts, illuminating the principles of democracy and human rights for which all good people stand.
Xue Meng-ren
Taichung
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”
RSS