As the year’s end approaches, does President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) still plan to lead the nation in a rousing rendition of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) party anthem on Jan. 1?
The lyrics of the current version of the anthem date back to 1924, when Taiwan was still under Japanese colonial rule.
It was adapted from an inaugural ceremony address given by Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙), a founder of the Republic of China (ROC), at the Whampoa Military Academy.
The KMT later commandeered it as its party anthem, after which it became the ROC anthem.
In 1945, the KMT government brought it to Taiwan and, through a combination of propaganda and punishment, courtesy of the now-abolished Act Governing the Punishment of Police Offenses (違警罰法), installed the anthem, which had little to do with Taiwan, as the national anthem.
The “three principles of the people” mentioned in the anthem are taken directly from the KMT’s founding ideology.
All political parties are entitled to laud their respective beliefs, but it makes no sense in a democracy for one party to insist that all others hark its words, which, to paraphrase the anthem, says: “Lead on, righteous men, be the vanguard for the people, following the principles by day and night, without rest.”
“The foundations of our party,” the anthem states at the beginning, with “party” referring to the KMT. It is astonishing that members of other parties, or independents, would be required to sing those words.
It is odd even if Tsai declines to sing the opening lines — “Three principles of the people, the foundation of our party, with these we establish the republic” — and chimes in only when the song reaches the line: “World peace be our goal.”
This is damaging the national image. In Taiwan, where democracy and transitional justice are emphasized, it is appropriate to address the issue of the national anthem.
Changing the nation’s official name and flag entail constitutional and legal considerations; changing the anthem does not. All it requires is the political will and an executive order.
In 1988, then-KMT legislator Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) asked at the Legislative Yuan whether the governing party should continue to insist on using its party anthem as a national anthem or whether elected representatives should determine the issue.
In 1990, then-legislator Chang Po-ya (張博雅) of the Non-Partisan Solidarity Union submitted a request to the Executive Yuan for an extemporaneous motion to change the anthem.
Then-KMT legislator Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) in response said that there was no reason that the anthem could not be altered, as long as the changes acknowledged the existence of the ROC.
“If the word ‘party’ in ‘foundations of our party’ is so sensitive, then just change it,” Hung said.
Clearly, the issue of the national anthem is hardly an intractable one for the KMT.
Taiwanese artist Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜) caused a stir when she sang the Chinese patriotic song My Motherland to mark China’s National Day in October. There was even talk of fining her NT$500,000 for contravening the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例).
If people were insulted that an artist performed a song glorifying China, what of the president leading the nation in an anthem belonging to a party that oversaw an authoritarian regime, irrespective of whether Tsai leaves out some words and whether she contravenes any laws in doing so?
Instead of putting the nation through this embarrassing scene every year, why not find a national anthem that everyone will want to sing?
Lau Yi-te is chairman of the Taiwan Solidarity Union.
Translated by Paul Cooper
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other