No matter what it does, the Ministry of Education can't seem to escape censure these days. The proposal to make Taiwanese history the focus of one of four textbooks for senior-high school students has been criticized, as has the proposal to reduce the proportion of classical Chinese taught. Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng (杜正勝) has been labeled many things as a result of these proposals, but the least appropriate of the labels is that of an agent of "desinicization."
The history syllabus will be covered by four books, one each for Taiwanese and Chinese history, with the other two for world history. Chinese history has not been removed, nor is its quantity any less than that of Taiwanese history, so this is hardly desinicization. The charge that reducing the proportion of classical studies is an act of desinicization is equally absurd.
The vernacular is a practical tool that we use every day. Classical Chinese is the language of the ancients, and for people today it is largely dead wood. Classical Chinese presently accounts for two-thirds of the high-school language curriculum, but much of what is learned is left behind when students graduate. In daily life, the vernacular is much more useful, as the reformer and liberal scholar Hu Shih (胡適) made very clear 86 years ago. It has been proposed that the proportion of vernacular Chinese should increase to 50 or 60 percent of the total. This is a long overdue adjustment. And in any case, both classical and vernacular Chinese are part of the Chinese language. This is hardly desinicization.
Those throwing accusations at Tu are overreacting to Taiwan's search for a national identity after years of "de-Taiwanification." They are disturbed by the diverse creative energy that has been released by democratization and a search for a new identity. They wish to stop the juggernaut of change by putting derogatory and irrelevant labels on practical reforms and what is becoming a mainstream ideology.
Such forces, which go against the interests of this land and its people, are a residue of a foreign political power. Manifestations of its presence are everywhere, and this is why Taiwan is yet to become a normal country. Over the last 20 years of democratization, Taiwan has had to escape the fetters of martial law and struggle against other forms of authoritarian control which have tricked the people and limited their rights and freedoms, preventing the normal development of society. Even now, with direct presidential elections and the development of democracy entering a new phase, our political environment is still full of aberrant phenomena.
On the international front, US Secretary of State Colin Powell has denied that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country, while domestically, the national emblem and anthem are still the same as that of a Leninist political party. The "soft coup d'etat" after the presidential election in March indicated that there are still those who believe the military is under the control of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which, despite its problems with cash flow, remains the richest political party in the world. Most importantly, Taiwan still does not have a constitution that is tailored to its needs.
On the path to normality, Taiwan must rid itself of the
residue of the martial law era, whether it be expressed in history, culture, politics, economics or other parts of society. In
correcting these abnormalities, some over-compensation cannot be avoided, especially in the face of foreign political forces at home and across the Taiwan Strait. But reforms in line with common values and justice are a duty that cannot be neglected. History always stands on the side of the righteous.
Lu Shih-hsiang is chief executive officer of the Foundation for the Advancement of Media Excellence.
Translated by Ian Bartholomew
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion