Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) earlier this month issued a new slogan when he said China would “never permit any person, any organization, any political party, at any time or in any form to separate any piece of Chinese territory from China.”
With the exception of leaders of the Chinese Communist Party routinely using this sentence structure — “we will never allow” — it is something that is more often said by gangster leaders. They can often be heard saying things like “we will never allow any person, at any time or in any way, to betray the organization.”
They might also address the outside world, saying things like “we will never allow any person, at any time or in any way, to challenge our gang” or “we will never allow any person, for any reason or in any way, to delay payment when we collect debts” or “we will never allow anyone at any time to refuse to pay for protection.”
Generally speaking, the kind of gangster that habitually uses this kind of language does not have to be reasonable.
If you ask them why they have the right to not allow other people to do this, that or the other, they will just shout back at you, saying that they will never allow anyone at any time to question them, and you should be happy that he has refrained from giving you a good beating.
Xi’s gangster approach is not only aimed at East Turkestan — which the Chinese call Xinjiang — or Tibet — which they call Xizang, it is of course also aimed at Taiwan.
These first two are colonies under Beijing’s colonial rule, and they are not Chinese. Today, their people do not want to remain under Chinese rule, they want their independence restored, and it is not a matter of “separating any piece of Chinese territory from China.”
As for Taiwan, it has never been ruled by the People’s Republic of China (PRC), and it is not part of the PRC’s territory. Taiwan wants to continue to maintain its autonomy and independence, and this is also not a matter of “separating any piece of Chinese territory from China.”
However, this most fundamental reasoning is something that this gangster boss will never be able to understand.
The only thing he understands is the political mythology that says that China and Taiwan “speak the same language and are of the same race,” and because they share the same blood, the two should be united.
The odd thing is that the Chinese do not apply this mythical view of things to “Xinjiang” or “Xizang.”
East Turkestan and Tibet are racially different, speak different languages and have a different religion, history and culture, so they share neither language nor ethnicity with the Chinese.
Why, then, is Beijing forcing them to be parts of China?
One can only wonder how many Taiwanese have opened their minds and hearts to Beijing as a result of gangster boss Xi and his intimidations. In addition to expressing an anti-democratic hegemonic attitude, Xi also manages to not even get close to the core issue.
The issue of Taiwanese independence is not an issue of nationalism, and it is not an attempt to reject the idea of shared language and race; it is about choosing democracy and freedom, and about the significance of national sovereignty.
If Taiwan were annexed by China, its people would have to become citizens of an autocratic state. One can only wonder if most Taiwanese would want to be free Taiwanese — Taiwan enjoys an agreggate freedom rating of 91 on Freedom House’s scale of 100 — or citizens of China, a nation with an agreggate rating of 15. This is something that Xi and those of his ilk must understand.
A certain journalist, who used to hold an important post at the now-defunct Capital Morning Post, but then turned his coat with the wind and went on to write a column for the China Times, has said that the responsibility for resolving the cross-strait issue lies with President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and her government.
That is wrong to an almost unimaginable degree: The resolution to the cross-strait issue lies with China and its willingness to democratize.
Anyone who wants to stop worrying about Taiwanese independence should do their best to urge China to democratize. That is the only way to bring about a fundamental solution.
Lee Hsiao-feng is a professor at the Graduate School of Taiwanese Culture at National Taipei University of Education.
Translated by Perry Svensson
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
The recent termination of Tibetan-language broadcasts by Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a significant setback for Tibetans both in Tibet and across the global diaspora. The broadcasts have long served as a vital lifeline, providing uncensored news, cultural preservation and a sense of connection for a community often isolated by geopolitical realities. For Tibetans living under Chinese rule, access to independent information is severely restricted. The Chinese government tightly controls media and censors content that challenges its narrative. VOA and RFA broadcasts have been among the few sources of uncensored news available to Tibetans, offering insights
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS