A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN.
Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic Progressive Party, when then-US president George Bush was rumored to have referred to Chen as a “troublemaker” for standing up for Taiwanese sovereignty. Historians would view the COVID-19 pandemic as a watershed moment in which the international community stopped seeing Taiwan as a troublemaker and woke up to the dangerous actions of the Chinese Communist Party.
This narrative arc was traveling in a direction beneficial to Taiwan from that point until recently, when tectonic changes in the international order and the coalition of democratic allies began to make Taiwan’s situation feel once more precarious and uncertain.
The problem with narrative arcs is that they do not always continue on a predictable trajectory. The same thing is happening within Taiwan. What until recently could be perceived as a discernible line from post-World War II majority association with China as the “motherland” to what has been termed “natural independence” — an increased identification among ROC citizens with Taiwan, and a corresponding decline in identification with China.
This process has everything to do with generational transitions, the family environment in which Taiwanese have been raised and changes in the education system. It is the story of how a nation developed an awareness of its own ability to seek to improve its circumstances, and realized the importance of struggling against the system to fight for principles such as freedom, democracy and autonomy.
Until recently, the assumption was that this process of “natural independence” would eventually reach its logical conclusion: All Taiwanese would identify with Taiwan as home, the place in which they and their parents were born, and the ties of older generations with the wave of Chinese who came over from China with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) after the war would fade away.
Just as generational change has placed ties with China further in the past, so is it now consigning the will for freedom so evident among the generation that fought for democracy in Taiwan to a distant past.
In “Youth, democracy and identities” (Sept. 11, page 8), Taiwan NextGen Foundation chief officer of operation Elaine Ko (柯亮羽) wrote a thoughtful piece on what she called a “subtle but significant change ... in the normalization of Taiwanese identity.”
One could argue that the overwhelming presence of “natural independence” has diluted the sense of urgency that once sustained it. As Ko wrote: “For those born after democratization, being Taiwanese is simply natural... If identity no longer feels at risk, the motivation to safeguard it may weaken... Democracy is not static; it must be renewed by each generation.”
This drive is diluted, but has not disappeared. Fifteen years ago, the discourse was that the younger generation that would later give rise to the Sunflower movement was politically unengaged. This year, we have seen the “Bluebird movement” and civic participation in the mass recall movement.
It is imperative to foster civic awareness of external threats and a national identity. In a democracy, the dilemma is to do this in a way respecting individual agency and choice, as opposed to ideological indoctrination. That distinction appears clear in principle. In practice, in the era of social media, propaganda and polarization, the line can be blurred.
Chinese state-owned companies COSCO Shipping Corporation and China Merchants have a 30 percent stake in Kaohsiung Port’s Kao Ming Container Terminal (Terminal No. 6) and COSCO leases Berths 65 and 66. It is extremely dangerous to allow Chinese companies or state-owned companies to operate critical infrastructure. Deterrence theorists are familiar with the concepts of deterrence “by punishment” and “by denial.” Deterrence by punishment threatens an aggressor with prohibitive costs (like retaliation or sanctions) that outweigh the benefits of their action, while deterrence by denial aims to make an attack so difficult that it becomes pointless. Elbridge Colby, currently serving as the Under
The Ministry of the Interior on Thursday last week said it ordered Internet service providers to block access to Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu (小紅書, also known as RedNote in English) for a year, citing security risks and more than 1,700 alleged fraud cases on the platform since last year. The order took effect immediately, abruptly affecting more than 3 million users in Taiwan, and sparked discussions among politicians, online influencers and the public. The platform is often described as China’s version of Instagram or Pinterest, combining visual social media with e-commerce, and its users are predominantly young urban women,
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi lit a fuse the moment she declared that trouble for Taiwan means trouble for Japan. Beijing roared, Tokyo braced and like a plot twist nobody expected that early in the story, US President Donald Trump suddenly picked up the phone to talk to her. For a man who normally prefers to keep Asia guessing, the move itself was striking. What followed was even more intriguing. No one outside the room knows the exact phrasing, the tone or the diplomatic eyebrow raises exchanged, but the broad takeaway circulating among people familiar with the call was this: Trump did