The National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, is the world’s largest ethnology museum, yet regrettably, this nationally funded institution has accepted the political propaganda of “one China.”
The “East Asia Regional Cultures of China” section on the museum’s Web site says that “China has 56 ethnic groups, composed of Han Chinese and 55 ethnic minorities.”
These “56 ethnic groups” and specifically the “55 ethnic minorities” are a taxonomy compiled by the Chinese government. Among the 55 are the so-called “high-mountain tribes” — meaning Taiwanese indigenous groups. The Web site also includes a map of the “distribution of ethnic groups in China.” Taiwan is included in this.
The exhibition hall itself is divided into 10 thematic exhibition areas including “Musical Instruments,” “Religion and Writing” and “Transmission of Chinese Tradition.”
There is also an exhibition area on “Taiwan Indigenous Peoples.”
Do the museum staff truly believe that Taiwan is a part of China or have they just capitulated to China’s demands?
The staff are no doubt aware that Taiwan is a country, as their map of “China” includes a line traversing down the middle of the Taiwan Strait to separate Taiwan and China.
However, this median line was only added to avoid complaints about “one China.”
Perhaps the staff are just trying to round their bases concerning Japan-China relations. There are plenty of academics in Japan who place a “one China” mention in their articles just to play it safe. However, those academics tend to be second-rate and have abandoned their common sense.
On Tuesday, I called the museum’s head offices and asked them to remove the references to “one China.”
The office said they “understood” that Taiwan is not part of the territory of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and gave a half-baked explanation that the “China” referred to in the “Regional Cultures of China” exhibit was not referencing the PRC, but rather “areas with Chinese culture.”
However, I said: “The ‘China’ that the Japanese government refers to is the PRC. It doesn’t include Taiwan,” adding: “You should not lump Taiwanese indigenous groups in with the minority ethnic groups of the PRC — Taiwanese indigenous groups have nothing to do with ‘Chinese culture.’”
Still, the museum office staff insisted that many Taiwanese who visit the museum are quite happy to see an exhibition that includes Taiwanese indigenous groups.
In response I said: “Just because they are not making a fuss, does not mean that they are happy that the museum is purposely mislabeling them.”
The museum’s office said that up to 200,000 visitors visit the museum every year.
I told them: “Please do not mislead all these people into thinking that Taiwan is a part of China,” adding: “China’s ‘one China’ principle is political propaganda and the museum should not politicize academic research.”
I pressed them to take down their inaccurate displays, unsure of how a museum that has already aligned itself with Beijing’s propaganda might respond.
I realized that Taiwanese museum-goers’ charitable attitude and reluctance to complain gives this museum and others the false impression that they can explain away the severity of their bullying of Taiwan through their “one China” capitulation.
Both the government and Taiwanese must speak up and say that “Taiwan” is simply “Taiwan,” especially in this age of Chinese cognitive warfare.
This needs to be done as soon as possible and at every chance.
Hideki Nagayama is the chairman of the Taiwan Research Forum.
Translated by Tim Smith
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS