It is almost a historical irony that former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) have both sparked debate with their — arguably mutually exclusive — attitudes toward the nation’s history with China and Japan from 70 years ago.
While what underlies both historical narratives — underlining Taiwan’s particular connections with the two nations — is an argument belonging to a past era, there are significant differences between their views on the present and future.
Lee and Lien have both brought up “Taiwan” as a community — an article in a Japanese magazine in Lee’s case and Lien’s speech during a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) yesterday.
Lee separated Taiwan’s political existence from that of China, adding that the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution contradicts existing circumstances.
He said he has confidence that younger Taiwanese can “break away from the old and revolutionize politics.”
Lien, on the other hand, upheld a “Taiwanese consciousness” during his meeting in China, portraying it as the spirit of endurance and solidarity Taiwanese have cultivated through 100 years of foreign rule and hardships. However, Taiwanese consciousness “should not be equated to or used for secessionist [calls for] independence,” he said.
Certainly, no argument other than common ancestry is needed for unificationists’ assertion of Chineseness; the war against Japan was an effort by “all Chinese children,” including Taiwanese, Lien said, in an apparent retort to Lee’s comments.
Lien ties not only Taiwan’s past but also its future to China, repeating the hackneyed rhetoric of cross-strait cooperation on trade and market development based on common Chineseness and the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Lee, unlike Lien, does not expect cooperation per se — even if it is with Japan — to boost the economy.
He said the point is innovation and new thinking — citing the example of the Internet of Things — and that it is the younger generation who hold the key.
Taiwan and Japan, Lee said, “have deep bonds,” but probably to his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) detractors’ disappointment, Lee never said that Taiwanese “are” — note the tense — Japanese.
He said he and his brother fought as Japanese for their then-motherland 70 years ago; he did not say that “all Taiwanese” regard Japan as their motherland.
What Lee said was that there was no “war of resistance against Japan” in colonial Taiwan in the sense that there was a country-to-country war taking place in China from 1937 to 1945, not that there was absolutely no “anti-Japanese-rule activities” in Taiwan.
The real problem the KMT has with Lee and his claims does not lie in the historical fact that Taiwan was once part of the Japanese empire. The problem the party has is with disconnecting Taiwan from the ROC, or China’s “war of resistance” rhetoric, and thereby the epic story of a glorious fight against foreign nations as a whole in the name of the Chinese nation that has made the KMT and its ilk hysterical.
Naming Japan as people’s zuguo, (祖國 , or motherland), even adding “70 years ago,” is not acceptable, for, as KMT Legislator Lin Yu-fang (林郁方) said zuguo indicates “where your ancestors lived and Lee’s ancestors came from China’s Fujian Province.”
Lien’s implied point is: “Insofar as Lee’s ancestors came from Fujian, China, his zuguo should be China, which should also be the case with other Taiwanese.”
While nonagenarian Lee, nostalgia over Japanese rule notwithstanding, has no doubt about Taiwanese identity borne from the land and its history, and shared by young people, the KMT, represented by Lien or not, is trapped in a limbo formed by its anachronistic and inconsistent beliefs in an ROC without Taiwan’s locally grown perspectives.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS