The protests by high-school students in front of the Ministry of Education have subsided and the students and activists have returned home. However, their tearful exit on the night of Aug. 5 is not the end of the movement: Students and activists will continue to fight against the biased texts and the non- democratic procedures of Minister of Education Wu Se-hwa (吳思華) and the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
How should these new social movements — such as last year’s Sunflower movement and even younger organizers and activists of the curriculum protests — be interpreted?
Some critics try to portray them as a “radicalization” of the younger generation, calling them “anti-Chinese.” However, young people represent the new norm: They have moved away from the old-fashioned nationalism of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and are proud of their new-found Taiwanese identity.
This trend has been going on for some time. It actually started in the early 1990s with the transition to democracy. According to a survey by the Election Study Center of National Chengchi University, the percentage of people viewing themselves as “Taiwanese” rather than “both Taiwanese and Chinese” has reached almost 60 percent, and has accelerated since 2008, when Ma came to power.
So what are young people doing with their new-found identity? They value and treasure what people have achieved: a vibrant democracy and active civil society. That is why they take to the streets to protest — they perceive the actions of the Ma administration, including over the trade in services agreement and the curriculum revisions, as non-transparent, anti-democratic moves that undermine the well-being of the people.
The two movements were not “anti-China” per se, but were a protest against the closed-door, smoke-filled backroom ways in which the Ma administration was manipulating to push a newly democratic Taiwan closer to an autocratic and repressive China. These moves were a violation of the new norm of society in a free and democratic nation.
As an activist who participated in the Sunflower movement, I can say that what really disturbed us was the nonchalant and arrogant way the Ma government tried to push the service trade agreement through the legislature. This made a mockery of the principle of checks and balances that should be an integral part of a democratic system.
By the same token, the high-school students who took to the streets were first and foremost disturbed by the authoritarian way in which the government planned and implemented the self-serving and distorted changes to history textbooks. They felt that such manipulation of history has no place in a modern democracy.
So, where does Taiwan go from here? What does “I am Taiwanese” mean? It means that we the young people are proud of who we are. We are proud of our rich and multicultural history. Yes, many of our ancestors came from China, but they were pioneers who built a new life here. Our history also includes our roots in the Aboriginal communities and the new immigrants of Southeast Asia in recent decades. Also the nation was ruled by the Dutch, Spanish and Japanese. These cultures are also part of our heritage and add to our diversity.
The most important element is that Taiwanese want to determine our own fate. We have worked hard to make this a free and democratic country. We want to help make it a vibrant democracy that cares for its people and listens to its people. That is what it means to be Taiwanese.
June Lin is a student at National Taiwan University’s Graduate Institute of National Development. She has worked this month as an intern with the Formosan Association for Public Affairs in Washington.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion