Former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator and National Dong Hwa University academic Yosi Takun (孔文吉) — a member of the Sediq community — traveled to China to attend an exchange event hosted by Yunnan Minzu University.
There, he repeated the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “united front” slogans. I strongly agree with Malas Takisdahuan’s (邱孟玲) criticism of Yosi’s remarks in her article published in the Liberty Times — sister newspaper of the Taipei Times — on Friday. This article serves to support and respond to Malas’ arguments.
There were many falsehoods in Yosi’s remarks. The only reasonable statement he made was that “minority cultures are an important part of Chinese civilization.” However, Taiwanese indigenous peoples are not part of China’s minority cultures.
The “Out of Africa” theory — a theory explaining the spread of humanity widely accepted in contemporary academic circles — proposes that all humans share a common ancestor who originated from Africa.
The ancestors of Han Chinese people lived in regions suitable for agricultural development, allowing them to become the dominant ethnic group earlier than the ancestors of minority peoples. As a result, they were able to develop more complex political systems much earlier, and regarded themselves as the only advanced and civilized society in the Central Plains area of China — to them, other ethnic groups were barbarians. However, in Chinese history, many other ethnic minorities also developed political systems rivaling the Han’s, such as the Liao, Jin, Yuan and Manchu Qing dynasties. Those cultures are, of course, integral parts of Chinese civilization.
Interactions between Taiwanese indigenous peoples and the Han Chinese have a 400-year history at most. How, then, can Yosi claim that Taiwan’s indigenous cultures are a part of Chinese civilization?
The CCP’s assertions that Taiwanese indigenous peoples are a part of China’s ethnic minorities are based solely on the claim that their early ancestors came from China. However, the migration of those people to Taiwan is estimated to have occurred at least 5,000 to 6,000 years ago, when the world was still made up of tribal societies and the concept of “China” did not exist. If such a weak connection is enough to claim that Taiwan’s indigenous peoples are part of China’s ethnic minorities, then should everyone not return to Africa to reconnect with their long lost relatives?
In its efforts to push its “united front” tactics, the CCP has come up with all kinds of fallacies to take advantage of Taiwan. All the more nauseating is that some Taiwanese politicians have echoed those narratives to gain political resources. By parroting the CCP’s rhetoric, Yosi is siding with the enemy and betraying his people — there is even a possibility that his ancestors fled to Taiwan thousands of years ago to escape persecution by the Han.
One can only hope that, as he does this, Yosi stops to think about how he would face his ancestors when it is time to cross the rainbow bridge.
Chen Chun-bin is a professor at Taipei National University of the Arts.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) has said that the armed forces must reach a high level of combat readiness by 2027. That date was not simply picked out of a hat. It has been bandied around since 2021, and was mentioned most recently by US Senator John Cornyn during a question to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday. It first surfaced during a hearing in the US in 2021, when then-US Navy admiral Philip Davidson, who was head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said: “The threat [of military
RSS