On Nov. 12, the birthday of "founding father" Sun Yat-sen (孫中山), some people closely attached to the pan-blue camp, after paying their respects at the Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall, laid portraits of Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng (杜正勝) and Exam-ination Yuan member Lin Yu-ti (林玉体) on the ground and pelted them with eggs.
On the same day, a bomb was placed near the Ministry of Education, and an old soldier cut his throat in protest over the recent dispute about ending Sun's status as "founding father."
Lin and Tu's irresponsibly voiced proposals to remove questions about China's history and geography from the entry-level national civil service examinations and to modify senior high-school history materials to separate the history of Taiwan from that of China have sparked a conflagration in the pan-blue camp and made high-ranking pan-green officials anxious.
In political reality, Taiwan and China are two hostile powers, but unlike most enemies, this is because China regards Taiwan as part of its territory, a status Tai-wan rejects. In this situation, talking about sovereignty or cultural independence in Taiwan is inevitable, especially as the government elected by its people has sufficient power to govern itself, whereas China has no jurisdiction over Taiwan at all.
China's belief that talk in Taiwan of sovereignty and cultural independence is a slippery slope to independence is used as its rationale to criticize and threaten Taiwan.
That Taiwan is a sovereign and independent state is a fact, and that its culture has its developmental uniqueness is also widely recognized. But Taiwan has been profoundly influenced by Chinese culture. Pro-independence people, and indeed all Taiwanese, read Chinese, speak Chinese, eat Chinese food and may also take Chinese traditional medicine.
Cultural and political independence should be dealt with separately, but given an inability to demand political indepen-dence, some people instead make a big fuss over cultural independence. Superficially, this might seem to be aiding Taiwan independence, but in reality, it makes the whole situation worse.
If you say that the nation's "founding father" is a foreigner, would you also regard Minister of Justice Chen Ding-nan, (
And what about deities such as Matzu, Kuankung (the god of war) and even the Jade Emperor himself? Are they from the enemy camp as well?
As for the issue of the civil service exams, since these are national tests, there certainly is a question over the proportion of Chinese and Taiwanese history and geography included, for this relates directly to a country's sovereignty and independence. Since Taiwan is not capable of ruling China, Chinese history and geography should not be associated with our nation.
There was a compromise proposal to remove history and geography from the examination, but some pro-independence Examination Yuan members still insist on a Taiwan nation and argue that therefore national history and geography examinations should not be abolished.
Every country's educational system should give its students knowledge of their country, and textbooks should reinforce national consciousness. But Taiwan independence is still not yet a fact, and there are still major obstacles to independence.
Strongly emphasizing independence might go beyond political reality and might not only be difficult to implement, but cause controversy or lead to disaster.
While the political conflict among different ethnic groups has been aggravated since the presidential election earlier this year, the controversies brought by Tu and Lin have exacerbated the situation. That the words of an Examination Yuan member and a minister were able to cause such a ruckus suggests that there are major problems in the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) policy-making.
Not only did the DPP not plan ahead but it lacked a clear policy; consequently, the party did not know how to handle the situation.
Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
President Chen Shui-bian (
What is more troublesome is that reckless statements about independence often lead to controversies, even as our enemy on the other side of the Taiwan Strait watches covetously.
These pro-independence people have valor but lack strategy. The ruling party still lacks both solutions and a strategy. This is the greatest crisis of our nation's politics today.
Chiu Hei-yuan is a researcher in the Sun Yat-sen Institute for Social Sciences and Philosophy at Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS