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.
With the Year of the Snake reaching its conclusion on Monday next week, now is an opportune moment to reflect on the past year — a year marked by institutional strain and national resilience. For Taiwan, the Year of the Snake was a composite of political friction, economic momentum, social unease and strategic consolidation. In the political sphere, it was defined less by legislative productivity and more by partisan confrontation. The mass recall movement sought to remove 31 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators following the passage of controversial bills that expanded legislative powers and imposed sweeping budget cuts. While the effort
When Hong Kong’s High Court sentenced newspaper owner Jimmy Lai (黎智英) to 20 years in prison this week, officials declared that his “heinous crimes” had long poisoned society and that his punishment represented justice restored. In their telling, Lai is the mastermind of Hong Kong’s unrest — the architect of a vast conspiracy that manipulated an otherwise contented population into defiance. They imply that removing him would lead to the return of stability. It is a politically convenient narrative — and a profoundly false one. Lai did not radicalize Hong Kong. He belonged to the same generation that fled from the Chinese
There is a story in India about a boy called Prahlad who was an ardent worshipper of Lord Narayana, whom his father considered an enemy. His son’s devotion vexed the father to the extent that he asked his sister, Holika, who could not be burned by fire, to sit with the boy in her lap and burn him to death. Prahlad knew about this evil plan, but sat in his aunt’s lap anyway. His faith won, as he remained unscathed by the fire, while his aunt was devoured by the flames. In some small way, Prahlad reminds me of Taiwan
Former Hong Kong media magnate Jimmy Lai (黎智英), who on Monday was sentenced to 20 years in jail for his role in the 2019 Hong Kong democracy movement and “colluding with foreign forces,” once called on members of the US government for support in his struggle against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Speaking to a forum at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in July 2019, Lai, speaking about the US having the moral authority over the CCP, said: “It’s like they are going to battle without any weapon, and you have the nuclear weapon. You can finish them in
RSS