It has been more than a week since the May 15 terrorist incident at a Presbyterian church in southern California and Taiwanese Presbyterians who have been reading about the shooting are horrified by what has happened, even though they themselves were not there. Indeed, many Taiwanese, who are not used to this kind of thing, will be feeling traumatized.
Officials in California said the incident was motivated by a political hatred of Taiwan, but from the age and sociopsychological profile of the perpetrator, coupled with the international political and diplomatic situation, it is perhaps not so much an example of an internal Taiwanese “provincial complex” and more a sign of foreign aggression.
First, why attack a Taiwanese Presbyterian church in California and not the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan?
The Presbyterian Church in Taiwan is associated with political activism and many prominent figures, such as former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), Taiwanese democracy pioneer Peng Ming-min (彭明敏) and former director of mental health at the WHO Lin Tsung-yi (林宗義), were Presbyterians. However, a survey by Academia Sinica showed that only about 4.5 percent of the population of Taiwan is Christian and about 1.5 percent is Catholic. Contrast this with the 80 percent of Taiwanese who identify as Taiwanese and can therefore be considered, in a broad sense, of being pro-Taiwanese independence.
Attacking overseas Taiwanese because of a provincial complex makes the shooter an enemy of Taiwanese. Attacking Taiwanese Presbyterians in California still conveys the warning against Taiwanese independence advocacy, but it is less overtly anti-Taiwanese.
The 68-year-old alleged perpetrator is a second-generation Mainlander born in Taichung, who went to university in Taiwan and taught at university before emigrating to the US, showing that he comes from a family background of a certain degree of means. However, he later separated from his wife and his life started to unravel — is it possible that he was somehow led astray and that this led him to perpetrate this act of terrorism?
Perhaps a psychiatric evaluation could help us understand the motive.
A possible triggering factor was updates made to the Taiwan-US relations fact sheet published on the US Department of State Web site, from which references to Taiwan being “a part of China” and that the US “does not support Taiwan independence” have been removed.
These changes fall short of altering Taiwan’s status, but they likely infuriated groups affiliated with the Chinese government and might have led to this terrorist attack.
Many people have already recommended that groups and organizations in Taiwan with similar links to the Chinese government should be thoroughly investigated to ensure that an attack does not happen in Taiwan.
A church is a sacred place. To attack people in such a place is therefore an extremely blasphemous act. Islamic extremists have been known to attack Christian churches, while the most common place where anti-Semites attack Jews is a synagogue.
What was the objective of a Chinese nationalist extremist wanting to murder people in a church where Taiwanese are known to gather, in California on the other side of the Pacific Ocean? Was it to warn Taiwanese not just in Taiwan, but also overseas, not to advocate for Taiwanese independence? Is this an indicator of foreign aggression?
The Economist last year ran an article calling Taiwan “the most dangerous place on Earth.” All Taiwanese need to be united and be vigilant against the possibility of further terrorist attacks.
Chen Chiao-chicy is a psychiatrist at Mackay Memorial Hospital.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with