Before I ever set foot in Asia, I had scant awareness of Taiwan’s issues vis-a-vis China. Then I found myself living in Shanghai and learning about Taiwan from the wrong side.
It was one friend in particular who shared with me the Chinese nationalistic view. I pushed back with what little knowledge I had.
“Taiwan has its own government, and its people are not citizens of China,” I said.
My Shanghai friend told me that, despite perceptions, Taiwanese wanted to “rejoin” China one day. Although I took his words with a grain of salt, I was somewhat swayed by three facts I had not been aware of: Taiwan’s actual name contained the word “China”; the National Palace Museum in Taipei proudly displays an outstanding cache of historical artifacts collected from various Chinese dynasties, as if that history was shared; and its government was ruled by a party that called itself “Chinese Nationalist.”
This was in 2007, when the Democratic Progressive Party held the presidency, but the point was valid. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was a major player at the time and returned to power the following year.
I have now been in Taiwan for six years, and needless to say, I no longer question Taiwan’s existence as a sovereign country. I pay no heed to the history of 70 years ago, or the fine print of this or that treaty signed by people long since dead. All that matters when considering Taiwan’s statehood is that several generations have developed their own culture, built their own infrastructure, developed countless schools and institutions, and are the architects of their own governance structure. It belongs to no one else.
What has stayed with me, though, was that my Shanghai friend’s reasoning was persuasive to me in my naive state. Seen from a distance, without the benefit of living here, the issue of Taiwan’s status becomes an academic argument, not a humanistic one, to the vast majority of Westerners and others who understand little about Taiwan.
This is perhaps reflected in a recent poll that showed negligible appetite among the Western public for their countries to intervene militarily if Taiwan were attacked by China.
The influence of Chinese who interact with foreigners should not be underestimated. As with my Shanghai friend, they use the imprints of China found around Taiwan — from China Steel to China Airlines to the “national” museum that holds their treasures — to persuade others that Taiwan and China are simply in the midst of an unresolved “internal dispute.”
It is well understood that removing China’s image from institutions that are tied to the government would put Taiwan’s security at risk.
However, there is one part of the national establishment that could be easily eliminated with no liability, and it requires no government action. At the voters’ whim, the “Chinese nationalists” — the KMT — could be wiped from existence.
As a foreigner, perhaps I have no business calling for political upheaval in Taiwan, but in this case, I am not concerned with the KMT’s policies or leadership. I am only imploring Taiwanese to consider what message they send to the world at large by voting for a party whose name overtly implies that the nation Taiwanese have built belongs to a foreign country.
I understand the KMT’s century-old history, first as a ruler of China under Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙), and later as an exiled government in Taiwan under Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), but today it is just a shell of its former self. Surely no one within the party is under the illusion that the KMT might one day return to Nanjing to rule the great empire. If the Chinese Communist Party ever falters, it would be replaced by a movement relevant to contemporary China, not a relic that holds a few seats in Taiwan’s legislature.
Taiwan is now in a stage of its evolution where few under the age of 70 hold any nostalgic desire for Chinese rule. It seems odd that a local political party dares to continue to serve this insignificant constituency with a name that supports China’s claims at a time when Taiwan is struggling for greater recognition of its sovereignty.
Anyone voting in local elections next month, and in the national elections that follow in 2024, should be aware that the KMT’s successes at the ballot box are used by potentially millions of Chinese and Chinese expats to convince foreigners — including international leaders and envoys — that Taiwanese are really “Chinese nationalists.”
The KMT once served a purpose, but the party now harms the nation’s image on the world stage, and hinders the long-term goal of having the country recognized internationally as the Republic of Taiwan.
Electing KMT members to any office provides fodder for Chinese officials who tell global leadership that the cross-strait conflict is a matter to be solved “internally.”
Making the KMT obsolete, on the other hand, might help create an environment in which other imprints of China are more easily removed from the Taiwanese landscape.
Michael Riches is a copy editor at the Taipei Times.
The views expressed in this article are his own.
A recent report concerning a student who is suing his teacher posed the question in its headline: Does failing a student in two subjects constitute bullying? The college student in Chiayi County apparently sought NT$2 million (US$63,603) in state compensation, but a court dismissed the case. The first reaction of many might have been to ask: What has happened to students nowadays? Some say that teachers have lost their authority, while others say students are overindulged. Some even start reminiscing over the days when “whatever the teacher says goes.” However, the real issue might be overlooked if emotional reactions like that are the
When I visited Taiwan last summer, I called on the nation to use its status as a technology superpower to build superweapons. It is obvious to me as I return a year later that Taiwan is now answering that call. By 2030, Taiwan envisions a domestic drone hub, capable of producing large quantities of drones per year. The nation continues to tighten cooperation across the private sector, scientific researchers and the elected government, on creating new and innovative production avenues for defense, while efforts to become central to the “democratic supply chain” are only increasing. Anduril is seeing all of these positive
Singaporean former Prime Minister and current senior minister Lee Hsien- Loong(李顯龍) last month stood on Chinese soil and told Beijing that Singapore cooperates because of “shared interests”, not because of common “ethnic descent,” a significant statement that has upended China’s cognitive warfare tactics of “ethnic nationalism.” Along with using its military buildup and economic growth to expand its international dominance, China has long deployed ethnic politics to promote the idea that all ethnic Chinese around the world, regardless of citizenship, share a tight bond with the Chinese motherland, by which it means the regime of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
President William Lai Ching-te’s (賴清德) May 20 second-anniversary address was not just a routine policy review; it was damage control. US President Donald Trump’s remarks — that he did not want to see anyone move toward independence and that the delivery of a major Taiwan arms package could depend on the progress of US-China relations — unsettled Taiwan’s public and created an opening for opposition parties to question whether Taiwan was being treated as a bargaining chip in Washington’s dealings with Beijing. Lai’s speech was designed to close that opening. The address covered the expected ground: sovereignty, cross-strait relations, defense spending,
RSS