The period from former president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) administration from 1988 to 2000 through former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) two terms from 2000 to 2008 and President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) rule since 2008 has reflected political development in the post-president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) era: The shaky path toward development amid the struggle between Taiwanese localization and Chinese colonialism.
Lee attempted to transform the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) into a Taiwanese nationalist party and make the Republic of China (ROC) more Taiwan-centered. In 1999, he proposed the special state-to-state dictum to define relations between Taiwan and China, and this should have been an opportunity for the Chinese colonialist KMT government to get a new lease on life in Taiwan.
However, the stubborn KMT was unable to clearly see the historical trend and made every effort to expel Lee from the party. Since Taiwanese politicians inside the KMT mostly bend with the wind, they were unable to consolidate Lee’s line.
During Chen’s time in office, Taiwanese outside the KMT tried to make the ROC Taiwan-centered using the force of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), reiterating that there is “one country on each side” of the Taiwan Strait.
Unfortunately, Taiwanese had been brainwashed for years by the Sinicization ideology that had taken root at every level throughout society. Since the DPP did not hold a legislative majority most of that time, it was blocked repeatedly, while it was unable to convince Taiwanese living abroad to support localization.
Despite Chen’s accomplishments, he was attacked from every direction and failed to consolidate localized rule and was seriously humiliated and tormented after stepping down in 2008.
Ma has been eager to draw a line between his own and Lee and Chen’s 20-year rule by reversing their road toward reconstruction and reform. He has resumed the attitude of the two Chiangs, secretly promoting the colonial nature of the KMT by joining hands with the Chinese Communist Party to control Taiwan.
He is incompetent and extremely evil, and merely shouts slogans about economic development. He hides corruption behind an anti-corruption image, while collusion between government and industry becomes worse and worse, clearly exposing the chaos and failure as the KMT’s collapse became apparent in the nine-in-one local elections in November last year.
The 28-year period from Lee through Chen to Ma — assuming Ma can finish his term — should have been long enough for a country to turn its misfortune into fortune and rise from ruins. The rule of the two Chiangs in Taiwan overlapped with the Martial Law era. If democratization and localization are to be realized in the post-Chiang era, a shared national entity will be formed, and the formation of such a shared community would be a significant historic development.
Unfortunately, some Taiwanese and many Chinese exiles who have not abandoned their Greater China colonialist attitude and refuse to truly identify themselves with Taiwan are not allowing this glorious historic change to take place.
Meanwhile, China is using its newfound economic prosperity and capitalist logic to lure Taiwanese, who attach great importance to the economy.
This is a critical challenge to Taiwan. Without the progressive cultural vision of localization, Taiwan will not be able to follow the road to freedom through to its end.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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