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
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS