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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.