The passing of professor Peng Ming-min (彭明敏) on Thursday brings back many memories.
Peng was one of the early pioneers in Taiwan’s democracy and independence movement, who inspired many people like myself and my wife to work for Taiwan’s future as a full and equal member of the international community.
Our own story as activists in support of Taiwan began in 1973, when I read Peng’s A Taste of Freedom, in which he recounted his life story, interwoven with Taiwan’s history.
It was a gripping read that awoke my sense of anger at the injustice that Taiwanese were experiencing at the time. It started a lifetime of activism in support of Taiwan’s democracy and fight for human rights.
A first opportunity came in December 1975, when we were able to organize a lecture for Peng at the University of Washington in Seattle, where we were doing our graduate studies at the time. We were able to involve a number of the university’s prominent professors in the event, so it was a success.
Of course, agents of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) tried to disrupt the event and tore down posters advertising the lecture. We had many spare posters, so we put up new ones where the old ones had been torn down.
The experience gave us a taste of the repressiveness of the KMT regime and the lack of freedom of expression in Taiwan at the time.
A second opportunity came a few years later. In the summer of 1979, the World Federation of Taiwanese Organizations held its annual conference in Seattle. The organization was quickly becoming a core for overseas activists in support of human rights and democracy in Taiwan, and Peng was one of the keynote speakers.
In discussions with Peng, and with Japan-based Lynn Miles, we agreed it would be good to establish an English-language newsletter to focus attention on developments in Taiwan, and the lack of human rights and democracy in the nation.
From the summer 1979 through December 1980, we published the Newsletter of the International Committee for Human Rights in Taiwan, which presented a detailed account of the Kaohsiung Incident and its subsequent trials.
This newsletter formed the foundation of the subsequent Taiwan Communique, which we published from December 1980 through March 2016. It constitutes 35 years of chronicling developments in Taiwan and the country’s transition to democracy.
Peng certainly stood at the foundation of our efforts in support of Taiwan. We kept in touch over the years. In the winter of 1982, he came to the Netherlands, after I had finished my studies in Seattle, to convince me to work for the newly established Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) in Washington.
However, I had just returned to my home country after some 10 years abroad, and had accepted a job with the Dutch government. It was not until many years later, in 2005, that I would start working full-time for FAPA.
Peng would continue his advocacy work, become FAPA president for several years, and after the transition to democracy in 1992, return to Taiwan. As is well known, he would become the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) candidate in Taiwan’s first presidential elections in 1996, running against his old friend Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).
Peng came to visit us again in 2003, when I worked for the Dutch government and we lived close to a beautiful old windmill near The Hague.
We met again in 2007, when I had returned to Washington. I was working for FAPA now. With the Brookings Institution, we organized an event on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the 228 Incident. Peng was the keynote speaker.
Another momentous event happened in 2012: the presidential election campaign in which the DPP’s Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) challenged then-president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
Together with others, Peng organized the International Committee for Fair Elections in Taiwan, and invited a group of foreign observers headed by former Alaskan senator and governor Frank Murkowski to observe the elections.
I was part of the group. Our conclusions were that the elections were free, but only partly fair.
In the 2016 presidential election, which pitted Tsai Ing-wen against the KMT’s Eric Chu (朱立倫), we had a second election observation mission.
This time Tsai won, and we concluded that the elections had been free and fair. To us, a lifetime mission had been fulfilled, and we decided to retire from FAPA and stop publishing our Taiwan Communique.
We met Peng for the last time in 2017, when we visited his home in Tamsui. He was indeed getting old and grumpy, but was still following the issues and — at the advanced age of 94 — had an opinion on most everything.
Thank you, Professor Peng, for what you meant to us in our lives. May you rest in peace.
Gerrit van der Wees is a former Dutch diplomat. From 1980 through 2016 he served as chief editor of Taiwan Communique. He teaches history of Taiwan at George Mason University and current issues in East Asia at George Washington University.
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