Taiwanese artists developing their careers in China often make statements — given freely or under pressure — that “Taiwan is a part of China.” Some Chinese spouses of Taiwanese who are Internet influencers have also sparked controversy for promoting “military unification” and the idea that “Taiwan is a province of China” during live streams.
However, Taiwan was not a Chinese territory for long: Before being controlled by China under the Qing Dynasty, it was occupied by the Dutch and the Spanish.
In 1661, Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功), also known as Koxinga, a Ming Dynasty loyalist, expelled the Dutch and occupied part of Taiwan as a base for his movement to restore the Ming Dynasty.
Cheng died in 1662. In 1683, to wipe out the remnants of the Ming Dynasty, Emperor Kangxi (康熙) of the Qing sent Cheng’s surrendered general Shi Lang (施琅) to attack Taiwan, bringing about the capitulation of Cheng’s grandson Cheng Ke-shuang (鄭克塽) and the incorporation of Taiwan into the Qing Dynasty’s territory the following year.
In the Sino-Japanese War of 1895, the Qing Dynasty was defeated and ceded Taiwan.
Taiwan became a Japanese colony and was ruled by Japan for half a century.
At the end of World War II in 1945, the US-led Allied forces defeated Japan, which gave up its sovereignty over Taiwan and Penghu.
In 1949, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) of the Republic of China (ROC) was defeated by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the Chinese Civil War, losing its territory and retreating to Taiwan, as well as what are now Penghu, Kinmen and Lienchiang counties.
The CCP set up its own regime and established the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
The PRC has repeatedly claimed sovereignty over Taiwan by arguing that it once belonged to China, saying that the “Chinese Civil War has not yet ended.”
The UN recognizes the PRC as the only legitimate representative of China.
However, the ROC has effectively ruled Taiwan, including its outlying counties, for 80 years, while the PRC has never governed it for a single day.
In 1949, the PRC erected a tombstone for the ROC on Purple Mountain (紫金山) in Nanjing, declaring that the ROC had perished, denying the fact that the ROC continues to exist in Taiwan.
World history is full of accounts of powers dividing and uniting territories, and no country can stand forever.
The territory of an empire often increases or decreases with the rise and fall of national power.
In the 13th century, Genghis Khan conquered the east and the west, established four khanates in Europe and Asia, and ruled China for nearly 100 years after toppling the Song Dynasty and establishing the Yuan Dynasty, but the only territory his descendants own today is the Mongolian steppe.
During the Roman Empire, most of Europe was part of what is now Italy.
The Netherlands occupied Taiwan in the 16th century through its maritime power, but later withdrew. Today, located in a corner of Europe, the Netherlands is even smaller than Taiwan [sic].
During the time of the Spanish Armada, many countries in Central and South America were subjects of the Spanish crown.
In the 18th century, the UK gained great national power through the Industrial Revolution and established colonies in the Americas, Africa and Asia to become the “empire on which the sun never sets.”
Before the founding of the US, its territory belonged to the UK.
Today, the UK is mostly limited to the British Isles and regards the US as its most important ally.
Russia used the fact that Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union as one of its reasons for invading. Ironically, hundreds of years ago Kyiv — the capital of modern Ukraine — was the seat of government for the entire region covered by the two nations today.
Powerful countries that intend to invade neighboring countries often use history as a reason, but history is history, and it is not a valid reason to expand power.
If every powerful country were to claim sovereignty over another country’s piece of Earth by citing history, there would never be peace anywhere.
Yihe is a retired business manager.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS