An editorial published in yesterday’s Taipei Times titled “China’s grasp of Taiwan history” reminds us of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) intention of annexing Taiwan under cover of academic research.
I could not agree more with the author: Thinking about the issue more deeply is necessary.
The CCP’s plan includes not just research on Taiwan’s history, but also broadly defined “Taiwan studies.” People should assess the significance of Taiwan studies regarding national security.
War has evolved into hybrid warfare. For example, in addition to guns and ammunition, non-military tactics carried out through academic research have become an important front line.
Hybrid warfare between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait has already begun. The government has put a great amount of effort into defending Taiwan, but besides enhancing the military, it can do a lot more to protect the nation.
If an armed conflict breaks out between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, nobody can say for sure how long the war would last, and the longer the war continues, the more unfavorable the situation would be for Taiwan.
All the countries that support Taipei are democracies. Their support, as well as how long they would be our allies in a war, depends on how strongly those their electorates identify with Taiwan.
People must understand a hard truth: Most Europeans and Americans are only vaguely aware of Taiwan. In this sense, people cannot necessarily count on their support for Taiwan during a war.
Around the end of last month, I participated in the Taiwan Studies Summer School, hosted by the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London. Professor Ann Heylen of National Taiwan Normal University’s Department of Taiwan Culture, Languages and Literature was the keynote speaker.
In her speech, Heylen advocated the establishment of global Taiwan studies using a research approach based on Taiwanese subjectivity. I cannot agree more with her viewpoint.
For decades, Taiwan studies has been limited to research on local cultures, and hence academics in the field can hardly obtain necessary resources. For example, it has never been easy for those in the field to receive National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) grants. The major reason is that applicants are required to publish articles in international journals: The more they publish their work, the higher the chances are that they would obtain NSTC grants. Yet it is difficult to publish articles thematically about Taiwan in international journals.
As Canadian academic Scott Simon said, for international academics, specializing in Taiwan studies could kill their career.
The author of the article worries that academic discourse in Taiwan could lose power in the international community. Unfortunately, this is not something that might happen in the future: It is happening right now.
Confronted by such an unfavorable situation, what can be done to strengthen the academic front line? The government can do a better job by integrating all types of research resources in Taiwan. Thus, researchers could cooperate to attain greater achievements. Taiwanese researchers should also be sponsored more to conduct Taiwan studies projects in collaboration with international academics.
Although it might take years for these initiatives to produce results, the effort would have long-term and far-reaching effects.
Compared with purchasing weapons, providing funds for Taiwan studies is only a drop in the bucket.
Chen Chun-bin is a professor at Taipei National University of the Arts.
Translated by Emma Liu
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises, the largest naval exercise in the region, are aimed at deepening international collaboration and interaction while strengthening tactical capabilities and flexibility in tackling maritime crises. China was invited to participate in RIMPAC in 2014 and 2016, but it was excluded this year. The underlying reason is that Beijing’s ambitions of regional expansion and challenging the international order have raised global concern. The world has made clear its suspicions of China, and its exclusion from RIMPAC this year will bring about a sea change in years to come. The purpose of excluding China is primarily
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent