In the past, every time the pan-blue camp or mainstream discourse came upon the question of independence, the typical response was to insist that it was unethical for separatists to manipulate issues of ethnicity. The assumption behind the ethnicity argument is that Mainlanders are pro-unification whereas ethnic Taiwanese are separatists. This perspective has become a static preconception in Taiwanese society.
There have been Mainlanders in the past such as Lei Chen (
Therefore, in the past, being pro-independence could almost always be equated with being ethnic Taiwanese. But with democratization, the liberating of society from political propaganda and growing attachment to the land from living in Taiwan, the situation no longer follows the stereotype.
Recently, a poll conducted by the Shanshui Public Opinion Research Co found that 76.1 percent of respondents believe that Taiwanese sovereignty belongs to the 23 million people of Taiwan to the exclusion of the 1.4 billion people of China; 15 percent believed the the 1.4 billion people of China also have a say.
The 15 percent who believe that Taiwanese sovereignty is shared with China, according to stereotypical conception, should be Mainlanders. As Mainlanders make up around 12 percent of Taiwan's population, the figures seem to match up.
But according to the polling company's cross analysis, this preconception is far from correct.
In fact, 70.5 percent of Mainlanders believe that Taiwanese sovereignty belongs to Taiwan's 23 million, while only barely one quarter, 24.7 percent, of Mainlanders believe that Taiwanese sovereignty belongs to China's 1.4 billion.
If these figures are used to calculate population, the results show that 570,000 Mainlanders believe that sovereignty belongs to China's 1.4 billion. Based on the figures then, after excluding other ethnic groups, the survey shows there are 2,650,000 ethnic Taiwanese who support the same view. The stunning result is that the pro-unification group is made up of more ethnic Taiwanese than Mainlanders.
To see 76.1 percent in support of sovereignty belonging to Taiwan's 23 million and to see that the majority of Mainlanders have arrived at the same conviction is a complete reversal of stereotypical expectations. We are of course happy to see independence become mainstream, but we are happier to see the independence issue disassociated from ethnicity.
The disassociation of separatism from ethnic status demonstrates that the pan-blue camp's previous stand that discussing independence or unification would intensify ethnic conflict is now wholly inapplicable. Moreover, whether ethnic Taiwanese or Mainlander, the fact that the percentage of Taiwanese supporting independence has grown from 10 percent as was the case in the 1990s to 76.1 percent now is surely the result of persistent public dialogue.
The dialogue process was of course difficult, and for many, even painful. But the result of it is that the national consciousness is gradually solidifying.
In a time when national consciousness is consolidating regardless of ethnicity, there are still those in both the ruling and opposition parties who sensationalize issues by connecting independence with ethnicity.
Such conduct is not only wrong, but also counterproductive and shortsighted given the direction of the development of Taiwanese consciousness over the past 10 years. In the long term, this approach creates no advantages whatsoever for any political party, let alone for the development of the country.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS