If the People’s Republic of China (PRC) democratized and the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan was still an authoritarian country, it would be understandable that members of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — who supported the imposition of martial law by former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) — changed their stance from being against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to supporting it, and opposed Taiwan being occupied and ruled by the ROC’s party-state system. After 1949, the KMT controlled the history of the ROC, which would mean the political progress made between 1945 and 2000 would become meaningless.
However, this is not the case. The PRC has not democratized. The global democratic front’s attempt to contain Russia by cooperating with China has failed. China and Russia remain the roots of an unstable global political order.
Going down a capitalist road, despite bolstering China’s economy to a certain extent, has not brought true happiness to the Chinese. The authoritarian regime has forced many to flee to free and democratic countries in Europe and the US.
The Tiananmen Square Massacre on June 4, 1989, confirmed that the PRC is anti-democratic. As the world’s factory, China has become a market economy, which does not sit well with its communist ideology. With its vast territory and huge population, China has become a capitalist country with the second-largest economy in the world. However, its domineering approach has raised concerns, which in turn has impeded its development.
In the late 1990s, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) promoted a “no haste, be patient” policy on investing in China. His advice was ignored by the business community, allowing China to become stronger economically and intensifying its threat against Taiwan. Now that the world has boycotted China for its ambition and its poor investment environment, Taiwan’s business community has gradually retreated from the Chinese market.
Following Taiwan’s democratization, the KMT no longer has the privileges it once had in the party-state era. Why would it expect something good from the PRC? Is it just because the Democratic Progressive Party is a rival and an enemy of the CCP? Does the KMT believe that an enemy’s enemy is a friend? Or does it wish to be exonerated from occupying Taiwan and being anti-CCP in the past?
If China was a democratic country that did not want to annex Taiwan, Taipei would be friendly to Beijing. Taiwan is one of the countries that are in the Han cultural sphere and writes using Chinese characters. It could have developed its own language, just as Japan and South Korea did.
Taiwan should build its own country in East Asia that is not subordinate to China. This is how the world should work, not the other way around — turning the world into a part of China. The Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty ruled China. Their territories were regarded as part of China. This is not the case for Japan, North Korea, South Korea and Taiwan.
If China was a normal country, an independent Taiwan could have diplomatic relations with it. Citizens of the two countries could have normal exchanges. The two countries would not have to bolster their invasive or defensive military capabilities. This would create peace and development opportunities in the Asia-Pacific region.
Before Chiang Kai-shek’s representatives were removed from the UN following the passage of UN Resolution 2758 in 1971, which recognized the PRC as “the only legitimate representatives of China in the UN,” intellectuals, who were waishengren (外省人) — mainlanders who fled to Taiwan with the KMT after the Chinese Civil War — had thought about preserving Taiwan by establishing a “Chinese Republic of Taiwan.” This historical event is worth reflecting on.
Some ROC citizens deliberately mix up the term “Chinese” with “PRC citizens” to create a confusing national identity. This is not just political, but also cultural. It contributes to the CCP’s ambition to annihilate the ROC. It does more harm than good to PRC citizens. It manifests the ugly side of these fence-sitters.
People in this country are “Taiwanese,” “Taiwanese of the ROC” and “ROC citizens.” Taiwan is to remain Taiwan until a consensus is reached, to avoid infringing on the rights of the PRC or being mixed up with it.
I look forward to constructive developments in Taiwan’s nationbuilding as democratization progresses. I also look forward to China putting an end to the CCP’s one-party dictatorship and developing into a democratic country.
However, it now looks like the Democratic Party in Hong Kong is to disband, putting an end to the territory’s road to democracy over the past 30 years. The democratization of China remains a distant hope.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Fion Khan
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS