The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) on Sunday last week spoke out against the claims of Chinese Central Foreign Affairs Commission Director Wang Yi (王毅) that Taiwan “has been part of China since ancient times.”
As someone who has researched the Dutch archives and the related literature, and who has written a book about the relations between the Dutch, China and Taiwan in the 17th century, I can confirm the validity of the MAC’s position.
If one thing is overwhelmingly clear from the available sources, it is that since ancient times until the early Qing Dynasty, no Chinese government ever claimed sovereignty over Taiwan.
Perhaps it is best to begin by summarizing what the Chinese ancient sources say, though I have to rely on English translations in this case.
The sources show that the first time Chinese authorities began to take an interest in Taiwan was during the Sui Dynasty (589-618). The annals of the dynasty state that a general was sent to try to subjugate the inhabitants to the Chinese empire.
However, the inhabitants, who did not speak Chinese, resisted, whereupon the general ordered his soldiers to set their houses on fire. When the authorities returned to the Sui territories, they took, it was said, thousands of prisoners with them.
So much for ancient sources. After the general’s visit, Taiwan was left to itself.
Next, let us turn to what Dutch sources say about the status of Taiwan in more recent times. A difference must be made here, though, between the status of the Penghu Islands and Taiwan.
The former had been incorporated into the Chinese empire since 1567 because they had been a haven for pirates ravaging the Chinese coast before that. Taiwan had remained independent.
The most important events related to the Dutch occurred in the 17th century. Under orders of forceful Dutch East Indies governor-general Jan Pietersz Coen to establish trade relations with China, an attack was launched on Macau in 1622.
The attack failed, and the Dutch fleet sailed on to the Penghu Islands, where they constructed a fort made of sod and earth.
The Dutch then contacted the authorities, but were told that they could not stay there, as they were on Chinese territory.
The Dutch commander said that in that case, they had no other choice than to start a war to force them to trade. The official was shocked by this answer and asked if they would not be satisfied with a harbor in the north of Taiwan, at Tamsui.
The Dutch commander turned down that offer because he had already heard that it was not a very good harbor. The war began, and it was not before many hostilities were conducted by both sides that they finally came to an agreement.
The Dutch, meanwhile, had received information about a place in Taiwan where they could moor their ships. It was near a large sandbank called Tayouan — present day Anping in Tainan — by Chinese traders who went there to trade with the Japanese.
The Dutch built a large fort on the sandbar that would be used as their headquarters for the area. They would stay there for about 40 years and conduct trade with the Chinese.
That the Dutch were allowed to remain in Taiwan for such a long time, without the authorities trying to stop their activities or evict them, is the best proof that the territory was not considered a part of China.
Chinese sources say that Taiwan was considered a “wild” territory, inhabited by people who had been categorized as “eastern barbarians.” Chinese authorities were just not interested in the island.
The presence of the Dutch in Taiwan came to an end with an invasion in 1661 of an army led by Zheng Chenggong (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga), who expelled the Dutch from the island and established his regime of the Southern Ming.
The status of the island would come under discussion in 1685, after the defeat of the Southern Ming regime by the Qing armed forces.
Some of those advising the emperor on what the status of Taiwan should be suggested it was best to leave the island to itself, again using the argument that it was “too wild,” too difficult to govern.
However, Qing navy commander Shi Lang (施琅) thought that ignoring Taiwan was too dangerous, especially with an eye on a possible repossession by the Dutch.
Although relations between the Dutch and the Qing government had been quite friendly, Shi thought that the situation might very well change at some time in the future.
The emperor accepted Shi’s suggestions, and, as is well known, from then on — until 1896 — Taiwan became part of Qing-era China.
A conclusion can therefore be drawn, based on the available sources, Chinese as well as Dutch, that Taiwan was not claimed by the Chinese authorities until the early Qing Dynasty.
To hope for the Chinese foreign affairs minister to change his narrative one day so that it would agree with the historical facts as recorded by his own country, as well as those of Dutch origin, is, of course, to hope in vain.
For now, the Chinese government remains under the control of a communist party that has lost the support of its people and depends on nationalist rhetoric to try to win back popular support.
Adrian van Amstel is a former English teacher from the Netherlands who worked for many years in Guangzhou, China. He is the author of China and Taiwan. Trade or War?: The Dutch East India Company in Conflict with China in the 17th Century, Leading to the Birth of Modern Taiwan
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS