A new debate on the national flag is taking place in Taiwan. The battle lines are predictable: the KMT and James Soong's (宋楚瑜) PFP are clinging to the old flag, brought over from China in 1945, while the TSU and significant parts of the DPP are in favor of a new flag that represents the new, democratic Taiwan.
It is good to take a step back and see how this issue is perceived by the international community, particularly the US and Europe. Overseas observers, governments and parliaments see Taiwan in a positive light because of its recent democratization, but the US and Europe can't bring themselves to normalize relations with Taiwan because of pressure from China.
This pressure is deep-rooted, primarily in the civil war fought from the 1920s through 1949 between the Chinese Communists and the KMT of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石). To the Chinese, the KMT and the ROC flag became symbols of that decades-long conflict.
Taiwan went through its democratic transformation in the 1980s and 1990s, which culminated in the election of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in March 2000. However, the new government took on the shell of the old system, including its symbols, such as the 1947 Constitution, the 1911 "made in China" flag and the equally outdated anthem -- a 1928 KMT song.
It is clear that those symbols have little to do with present-day Taiwan -- they are left-over attributes of the KMT's days in China. While it is perhaps understandable that the KMT old guard wants to cling to them out of a fast-disappearing sense of security, it would be wise for Taiwan to move to a new set of symbols.
The reasons are as follows: As long as Taiwan clings to symbols that are associated with the old civil war, it is a reminder that this civil war is not quite finished. For closure, it is necessary that these symbols are buried. An even more important reason is to find a new flag, anthem and Constitution that truly represent the new Taiwan. This process may take a few years, but it is an essential part of becoming a "new" nation. In the case of the US, it took 11 years -- from the 1776 Declaration of Independence to the 1787 Constitutional Convention. The US national anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner, wasn't written until 1814.
The old symbols represent only the KMT. Present-day Taiwan is made up of Aborigines, the Hakka- and Hokkien-speaking population, as well as the mainlanders who came over after 1945.
For Taiwan to survive, they all need to identify with the new Taiwan and evolve into a new identity that is truly Taiwanese in nature.
From the international perspective, it is also necessary to develop a new Taiwanese identity.
As long as Taiwan continues to present itself as the ROC, the international community will be forced -- by the "one China" dictum -- to maintain the line that only informal, economic and cultural ties are possible.
Only when Taiwan states clearly and unequivocally that it distances itself from the ROC identity, and presents itself as a new and democratic nation, will it be able to open the doors toward full recognition and diplomatic relations.
A fair and open debate about the national flag and anthem would be a good start.
Gerrit van der Wees and Mei-chin Chen are editors of Taiwan Communique, an international publication dedicated to democracy in Taiwan and full and equal membership of Taiwan in the international community.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS