Taiwan's geographical position was instrumental in putting it on the world stage during the great ocean-going age of the 16th century. It was because of this that the island became home to many different ethnic groups, and this ethnic diversity naturally led to the multicultural society we now have in Taiwan.
Ethnic and cultural diversity can easily cause ethnic and cultural conflict. If such differences are dealt with skillfully on a political level, however, this very diversity can be turned into a valuable asset for Taiwan.
In other words, if one does everything to avoid discord, remains broad-minded and designs a model in which all groups can be governed together, then this ethnic diversity will guarantee a wealth of talent. If one avoids discrimination and elitism and promotes a multicultural system, cultural diversity will ensure a blossoming culture. This is the first fundamental principle in planning for the future of Taiwan.
Complex historical factors have forced minority rule, colonialism and dictatorship on Taiwan throughout the past 400 years. This ended in 1996 when the Taiwanese people elected their president, ushering in a new era. This did not mean that Tai-wan was free of its pre-1996 historical baggage, and even now it is yet to break free of a triangle including the US and China.
The political reverberations left over from the end of World War II and the civil war fought between the Nationalists and Communists in China are still being felt today. The fallout has made Taiwan captive to the US and a renegade province that China stakes its claim to liberate.
Although Taiwan now meets all the criteria of a nation, it has yet to secure international recognition of its legitimate and full nationhood.
The US is a powerful nation quite capable of protecting its interests in Taiwan. That is not to say, however, that Taiwan has nothing bargain with. China is calling for unification, and if the Taiwanese want China to understand and respect their desire for autonomy, then they will also have to understand and respect why China has no alternative but to call for unification. Only then can the two sides move together in the same direction. It is far wiser to be positive than negative, and this would be a very important principle to follow.
American interests are not absolutely identical to those of China, and it would not be too difficult for Taiwan to secure benefit from both sides. What's more, globalization of the economy is inevitable, and this will significantly change international relations; even the concepts of national boundaries and arms need to be redefined. If we can deal with these changes well, we can reverse our current isolation. This is the second fundamental principle for planning for the future.
Taiwan's importance has always been the economic value of its productive output; this economic value has consistently assured its survival. Taiwan consequently needs to produce new ways of making money.
Taiwan has relied on different products at different times. In the past it has produced deer skins, camphor, tea, sugar, rice, clothes, jewelry, plastics and electronics. In the short term we can expect this role to be taken by bio-tech, but in the longer term the nation is likely to rely on its cultural and tourist industries. Why has no one in government sought to consolidate the various European, Chi-nese, Japanese, American and Aboriginal cultural resources that we have here? Could it be that no one up there has realized that the Pacific coast along Taitung is the nearest stretch of tropical coastline for the several hundred million tourists north of the Pashi Channel?
If these tourists were enticed to spend a few days each visiting Taiwan, and to spend NT$30,000 on Taiwan's cultural and tourism resources, this would become Taiwan's largest and most sustained source of economic interest. This idea needs to be seized and put into practice. Creating the conditions for cultural and tourist facilities of an international standard is the third fundamental principle.
The most important principle, however, needs to be recognized by the government, the opposition and the people. The present-day state of Taiwanese politics was not achieved through bloody revolution, but through a peaceful and gradual process. There is a huge difference between these two paths.
If there had been a revolution, the old system would have been overthrown and replaced by a new one overnight, and the differences between respective systems would have been stark. The non-violent route evades the tragic cost, but demands a kind of "payment in installments" from politicians and the people to offset the price of revolution. This installment plan entails its own kind of anguish, and changes in power and authority need to be borne with patience, tact, compromise and mutual consideration. This is the fourth fundamental principle in planning for the future.
Frank Wu is the chairman of the Public Television Service Foundation.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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,