The National Academy for Educational Research on Thursday last week reached a consensus with textbook publishers to include the original text of UN Resolution 2758 in school history textbooks, to teach students that the resolution says nothing about Taiwan, despite misinterpretations by China to isolate the nation.
The education system while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was in power after it retreated from China to Taiwan in 1949 inculcated a China-centered nationality, including teaching that “there is only one China — the motherland of Taiwan.”
As for Taiwan’s international status, textbooks used to focus on the 1943 Cairo Declaration, which states that a consensus was reached by the then-leaders of the US, the UK and the Republic of China (ROC) at a meeting in Cairo to restore Taiwan to the ROC. However, it has never been signed or ratified to be an international legally binding agreement.
The KMT’s manipulative agenda was obviously aimed to consolidate its authoritarian rule over Taiwan and to oppress Taiwanese to help in its pipe dream of retaking China.
The biased indoctrination has turned into a pretext for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and pro-China forces in Taiwan to promote the “reunification” of the two nations. In reality, it is just Beijing’s ambition to annex Taiwan, which the CCP has never ruled.
The immediate task — which is a big challenge — is to clarify Taiwan’s sovereignty and neutral international status amid intensified cognitive and legislative warfare in the past few years to belittle Taiwan by calling it a part of China. It misuses Resolution 2758, which was passed by the UN General Assembly in 1971, to support its “one China” principle and to position Taiwan as its subordinate.
However, the resolution states: “Recognizing that the representatives of the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) are the only lawful representatives of China to the UN” and “to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek [蔣介石] from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the UN and in all the organizations related to it.” It makes no mention of Taiwan.
The Academy for Educational Research, which is responsible for initiating school curriculum guidelines and reviewing textbooks, has proposed that history textbooks include the resolution’s original text in English and Mandarin, and make a clear statement that it asserts only the PRC’s legitimate representation of China at the UN, but never addresses the sovereignty of Taiwan or the ROC; neither does it preclude Taiwan from participation at the UN or other international organizations.
Textbooks should not only contain the Cairo Declaration, but also cover the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty and the 1952 ROC-Japan Peace Treaty, which ended World War II in Asia and Japanese occupation of overseas territories, but left the status of Taiwan undetermined and, according to official records of the negotiations of the San Francisco Treaty, to be resolved in accordance with the principles of peaceful settlement of disputes and self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter.
The Ministry of Education also plans to develop supplemental teaching materials on national identification, as well as helping students learn more about China and how to identify its propaganda.
In a democratic society, education and school textbooks should be consistently updated to reflect the latest historical research and international reality. Taking in 2006, following Taiwan’s democratization after lifting the Martial Law, the Taiwanese history finally was allowed to be taught as an individual subject for the first time. Taiwanese students could learn about the island based more on Taiwan native consciousness, instead from a complete China-oriented standpoint.
While a growing number of countries are objecting China’s distortion of the UN resolution and its one-China principle, Taiwan should make more efforts to help young people achieve a more comprehensive understanding of Taiwan and debunk the myth of a so-called “motherland,” which has long threatened to take over Taiwan by force.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
RSS