This week, it will be 25 years since the authorities in Beijing put down the student protests at Tiananmen Square. It is an important moment to reflect on what happened in those dark days. The spirit and the courage of the students still resonates with people all over the world. In commemorating June 4, 1989, we should also ask how China has changed in those 25 years, and what the lessons are for Taiwan.
In the past two decades, China has made progress in advancing living standards to raise some of the poor into the middle class and some have become wealthy. There has been rapid economic growth. People in the middle class are able to enjoy a better life. Nevertheless, in terms of political and civil rights, society remains stuck in an authoritarian mode and the rulers in Beijing refuse to acknowledge what happened in 1989.
Over the same period, Taiwan also changed very much: In 1989, it was right in the middle of a transition to democracy. The two governments, in China and Taiwan, were very similar back in the 1950s and 1960s, when both labored under authoritarian systems. Taiwan had the White Terror era, whereas China was going through the Cultural Revolution. Both governments were repressive and undemocratic.
However, in the late 1980s, Taiwan made the transition to democracy with the abolition of martial law. Ironically, in 1989 the Tiananmen Square tragedy happened, and the people on each side have gone in opposite directions since then.
Today, 25 years later, Taiwanese have achieved the fundamental rights to vote and freedom of expression. In contrast the people in China still suffer under the Chinese Communist Party’s control, without free press, fair elections or checks and balances in the system of governance.
Many in China have pushed for democracy, but the developments since Tiananmen 25 years ago show this is an uphill struggle. Although the Chinese government has achieved economic growth, the rulers do not appreciate citizen participation because that undermines the power of the party.
At a recent US Congressional Hearing on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of Tiananmen, Rowena He (何曉清) a lecturer at Harvard, said: “There can’t be a democracy without citizens’ participation... When government keeps punishing people who are willing to participate, the effect to the society will be profound.”
The participation of citizens is one of the key elements of a healthy democracy and is also one of the distinct differences between China and Taiwan today. The Sunflower movement is a good example of the importance of active civic movements for democracy: The movement succeeded where the elected government had failed, prompting lawmakers to agree to more transparency and input from the public on the controversial cross-strait service trade agreement.
Such citizen participation keeps the government on its toes. It is important for a democratic political system to be responsive to public opinion and adjust its policies in accordance with the widely held views of the populace.
What should Taiwanese have learned 25 years after Tiananmen?
First, as a democracy, Taipei should be more supportive of Chinese human rights. Elected officials, from the president down should use any possible chance to speak out for detainees and dissidents, such as jailed Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波). Close economic ties must not prevent Taiwan from standing firm about what it believes in: freedom and human rights.
Second, Taiwanese share the responsibility of keeping the memory of human rights violations alive, not only the events of Tiananmen, but also in Taiwanese history. Especially those born after 1989, who grew up in a free and democratic system without experiencing political suppression: We need to learn about important moments in our own history, such as the 228 Massacre, the 1979 Kaohsiung Incident and Deng Nan-jung’s (鄭南榕) “Green Ribbon” movement in the mid-1980s.
So, for Taiwan today, it is important to remember the lessons of history. As a new democracy, we need to watch out for general amnesia because it is easy to backslide. We need to consolidate our political system into a more mature and stable polity with ample citizen participation. If we move in that direction, the international community should welcome Taiwan with open arms.
Joyce Huang is an intern with the Formosan Association for Public Affairs in Washington.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s