As a strong supporter of Taiwan's self-determination and democracy, I nevertheless feel that the current Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) campaign against Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) ignores an ironic but simple fact: namely, that had Chiang and the Nationalists not taken refuge in Taiwan, it is a near certainty that the island would now be a province of China. Of course one can discuss UN mandates, referenda, and so forth. All were talked about at the time. But the island then was desperately poor and little known to the outside world -- probably unrealistic goals.
Chiang arrived in Taiwan and brought with him international political clout -- in the form of the old "China Lobby" in Washington -- that the established population could not supply. Precisely because of Chiang's international political strength, many Americans wanted to get rid of him from the moment his plane touched down at Sungshan Airport in 1949 -- not in order to foster a Taiwanese democracy, but to remove an "obstacle" to relations with China. That sentiment only gained strength as time passed. Declassified papers clearly demonstrate that by 1971 Nixon and Kissinger were secretly determined to make Taiwan unity with China. In their planning they drew on work done within the US government long before. At the time, few people cared about Taiwan being Taiwan.
Chiang, however, was able to draw on his broad US connections to maintain a military alliance crucial to the island. His son was the last man who had the power to hand Taiwan over to China, no questions asked. But he did not respond to Deng Xiaoping's (
As for the Chinese who fled with Chiang, they deserve some credit too. Not many soldiers were killed in the Cold War over the Taiwan Strait, but I would venture to guess that of the dead, many were Mainlanders. I well recall flying to Kinmen in the early 1970s. Nearly all the soldiers on the small plane spoke with strong mainland accents. Such Mainlanders were the core of the conscripted army that, often with great bravery, protected the Taiwanese from the horrors of Communist rule -- even as it enforced martial law at home.
History is complicated and rarely is it morally unambiguous. Thus I believe that every scrap of evidence about the 228 Incident and the White Terror must be dug out of party and government archives, brought to light, and properly dealt with. But I also believe that the contribution made by Chiang and his government -- which was no less than to keep Taiwan separate from China at a time when, arguably, no other group could have done so -- must not be ignored. Maintaining the separation in turn made it possible for Taiwan eventually to become a free and democratic state and determine its own future. Chiang Kai-shek had a lot to do with that.
Had Chiang not fled to Taiwan with his army, no memorial hall to him would stand in what would be today the dreary capital of Taiwan -- Province of the People's Republic of China, known chiefly for its pineapple and timber exports -- nor would any democratically elected president of Taiwan exist, able to change the name of that memorial, or lock its doors.
Arthur Waldron
Lauder Professor of
International Relations
University of Pennsylvania
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS