No. 5, September 12, 2019

The KMT caucus of the Legislative Yuan held a press conference criticizing history textbooks for fawning on Japanese rule and belittling the ROC.
(Photo from: China Times)

● Featured News: KMT Demands President Tsai Apologize For Japan Flattery And De-Sinicization In History Textbooks

● Featured Editorial: Vote Tsai Out Of Power And Rectify The History Curriculum
● Featured Opinion: The New Curriculum Guidelines Will Harm The Next Generation
● This Week in Taiwan: Other Important Events This Week

KMT Demands President Tsai Apologize For Japan Flattery And De-Sinicization In History Textbooks

China Times, September 6, 2019

The Kuomintang (KMT) caucus of the Legislative Yuan held a press conference calling into question the content of new high school history textbooks, which espouse a flattering perspective on the period of Japanese occupation but demean postwar rule under the Republic of China (ROC). The KMT parliamentary caucus denounced the Tsai administration and the Ministry of Education not only for their transgressing the primary mission of education, which is to inspire the younger generation, but also for infringing upon the value of pluralistic perspectives in a democracy. The new history textbooks are laced with passages fawning on Japanese rule. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) should not instill flawed concepts and mislead the next generation in order to cling to power. The KMT caucus asked President Tsai Ing-wen to apologize and Minister of Education Pan Wen-chong to step down.

 

Education Minister Pan Wen-chong should step down

Legislator Tseng Ming-chong, who is the leader of the KMT parliamentary caucus, criticized the Tsai administration for attempting to portray Taiwan’s international status as undetermined through the revision of the curriculum guidelines and history textbooks. Tseng questioned the political motives of the Tsai government in doing so. “Is it that the government attempts to promote ‘“de jure Taiwan independence’” or ‘"cultural Taiwan independence’"or to eliminate the Republic of China altogether?” asked Tseng. No wonder President Tsai has appeared reluctant to address our country as the Republic of China and inclined to say "this country" instead.  If the ROC is so repulsive to her, Mr. Tseng argued, then she is not qualified to serve as the president, much less run for re-election.

 

If so ashamed of the ROC, why run for president?

Tseng questioned why under the Tsai government, the history textbooks reviewed by the Ministry of Education should have accentuated the separatist argument of "Taiwan’s sovereignty undetermined" and even questioned the "legitimacy of the rule of the ROC over Taiwan and Penghu". It is self-contradictory for those high-ranking officials to enjoy all the benefits while doubting about the legitimacy of the ROC. “If these people were not suffering from the psychological problem of split personality, how could they still have the audacity of sitting on the high positions of the Republic of China?” Tseng said.

 

KMT Legislator Lin Yi-Hua also pointed out that under the DPP administration, high school history textbooks only mention the Republic of China after 1945. In other words, the ROC comes in to play after Japanese colonial rule in Taiwan. But in fact, the ROC was established in 1911, which is in the historical timeline of the curriculum but only listed in other important events in the high school history textbooks. This conveys no complete history of the ROC, which is a very serious deficiency.

 

Policy considerations reveal DPP government’s obsessive flattery of Japan 

Lin criticized that in addition to deliberately diluting the history of the Republic of China, the new history textbooks were full of fawning complexes, such as the issue of comfort womenwas not included in the textbooks; and Taksago Volunteers and Taiwanese Japanese soldiers etc. were barely touched upon in the textbooks.

 

Lin further raised examples that the history textbook description of the national language policy in the Japanese colonial period,  was "the establishment of a common language to break the boundaries of ethnic groups and to promote social exchanges and absorption of new knowledge;" and in sharp contrast was the negative comments on the national language policy of the Republic of China, "repressing dialects causing generations and language gaps, unfavorable to cultural inheritance and ethnic harmony." Another example was the evaluation about the media, which was positively described as "the channel for instant information and leisure" during the Japanese colonial era; however, it was negatively commented in the textbook as "the media tool to maintain political stability" during the ROC period.

 

From: https://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20190906002159-260118?chdtv

Vote Tsai Out Of Power And Rectify The History Curriculum

Editorial, China Times, August 11, 2019

 

Starting this new semester in August, ideas such as the theory treating Taiwan’s political status as undetermined has appeared in the new high school history curriculum. This is both shocking and painful to see. This move not only goes against mainstream opinions of the academic circle, it also omits the legality of the four historical documents, including the Cairo Declaration, revealing the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government’s agenda to alter national identity. Since they are afraid to actually go through with declaring independence, the DPP is now using history textbooks as a tool to politically brainwash the public.

 

The theory of treating Taiwan’s sovereignty as undetermined is not a new topic in both the political and academic circles, and is certainly not a taboo discussion in Taiwan, a society that encourages democratic pluralism and respects freedom of speech. The main problem is, while this can be a topic that can be explored academically, or open to political debate, it is not suitable and should not be put in history textbooks, which is supposed to educate the public on national history. The government should not use academic freedom as an excuse to allow reinterpretation of history, which will create chaos, and cause confusion to our national identity.

 

"Taiwan's sovereignty belongs to the Republic of China" is truth grounded in international law. The 1943 Cairo Declaration, 1945 Potsdam Declaration, 1945 Japanese Instrument of Surrender, 1951 Treaty of San Francisco, and 1952 Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty (Treaty of Taipei) all provide clear facts and support that the public can easily find.

 

Although the above textbooks cites some doubts about the validity of the declarations, or uses the Japanese Instrument of Surrender declared by the United Kingdom, the United States and other countries after the Second World War to back up these doubts, but these either lack stronger legal validity or just from the Western countries' own strategic interests at the time in the face of China's split. How can these invalidated logics be the main legal basis of Taiwan's status?

 

What needs to be clear is that history education does not completely equal historical research. The foundation of a country's historical education starts in elementary and middle schools. Qing Dynasty intellectual Gong Zizhen (1792-1841) said “to end one’s country, need to first end one’s history.” History education is vital to the survival of a country. Students of course are open to have open and speculative discussions, but under circumstances that they have the correct historical recognition and national identity. A clear and correct history education advocates that clearly "Taiwan belongs to the Republic of China" is unquestionable. Otherwise, the country will not be a country. The legitimacy of the government’s jurisprudence will disappear!

 

Academic research on national history, including various objections, excavations, interpretations, and analysis, is to allow university students and scholars to further explore and speculate, and to make historical materials and opinions more substantial. In fact, elementary and middle schools like Taiwan's "undetermined status" can be seen in Taiwan and can be freely discussed without any prohibition. The difference is that this argument should not be a proposition in middle school textbooks.

 

The previously mentioned textbooks set the "Theory of the Undetermined Status of Taiwan" as the title, and the two declarations such as Cairo as remarks on the side and considered them to be ineffective. The weight is not only disproportional but the position is also self-evident. When asked how important historical documents are mentioned so infrequently in the textbooks, the publisher replied saying it is necessary to "let the students examine themselves and then form their own historical identity." This is nothing more than the direction of the government-led curriculum and push the responsibilities to the curriculum writers, and the curriculum writers push the responsibilities to the publishers. It is ridiculous to be toying with the national identity of young students!

 

When President Tsai Ing-wen served as the chairman of the Democratic Progressive Party in the minority, she publicly stated that Republic of China is already ruling Taiwan as a government in "in-exile” Today, she has become the head of the "in-exile government" mentioned by her, and proclaiming “this country” using the unconstitutional name of "Republic of China Taiwan" while including "the undetermined status of Taiwan" in the history textbooks. What is this kind of flawed and causal logic? It’s really a word of chaos!

 

Now in order to win the re-election of the 2020 presidential election, Tsai is reverting back to the slogan of “defending the Republic of China”. But the newly invented “Republic of China Taiwan" under her leadership has already separated Republic of China and Taiwan in the Ministry of Education led history textbooks. On the same token, Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ website under the DPP’s administration still uses the talk track of "Taiwan’s status under international law" to make a statement to the international community that "Taiwan has already passed international legal procedures and is owned by the Republic of China"; A country that is sometimes in exiled, sometimes require defending, yet sometimes undecided has put elementary and middle school students’ national identity in crisis. When Ma Ying-jeou was elected president, but did not correct the incorrect history curriculum, the purpose of the Kuomintang’s return to power was greatly missed. For the presidential election of 2020, people must remember the mistake of the past and overcome the fear to fight for the correct history education for young Taiwanese students, and preserve the great history of the Chinese nation. Fight for victory and put things back on the right track!

 

From: https://www.chinatimes.com/opinion/20190811001839-262101?chdtv

The New Curriculum Guidelines Will Harm The Next Generation

By Lee Cheng-hsiu

China Times, September 1, 2019

Despite the doubting voices of teachers’ groups, the administration of President Tsai Ing-wen has forced the implementation of the new curriculum guidelines of 2019 from this semester, resulting in the chaos that “teachers are ill-prepared, and students have no way to follow.” Among the new learning systems, the most worrisome part is the arrangements and contents of the curriculum guidelines for history textbooks.

 

It is not an overstatement that Taiwan is a society of immigrants. After all, except the aborigines, the vast majority of people on Taiwan are ethnic Chinese moving across the seas from mainland China in different time spans. Therefore, it is a common historical development that the Taiwan society as a whole is based on the Chinese culture. The so-called “Greater China mentality” is nothing but a malicious vilification fabricated by the Pan-Green camp to attain its political goal of Taiwan independence and hatred towards China.

 

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government has greatly reduced the contents of Chinese history in the guidelines in the name of reducing students’ burden. The government also claims that the purpose of the guidelines is to allow the students to find their own answers. This claim would be fine if the curriculum guidelines for history had been based on the developmental history of Chinese people. Nevertheless, the problem is the stealthy and bait-and-switch tactics used by the pro-Taiwan independence scholars. Lacking an understanding of history and accurate curriculum guidelines, Taiwan’s young generation continues to be troubled by the question of “who I am.” They are just like “rootless orchids.”

 

More importantly, the curriculum guidelines for history intentionally differentiate the contemporary Taiwanese history from the Chinese history by using the year 1949 as the dividing line. This amounts to telling students that the two societies have no relations. The guidelines also instill the unconstitutional and illegal ‘Two States Theory’ into the minds of the students. This measure also questions the legality of the Republic of China (ROC) to govern Taiwan. The worst point is treating Taiwan’s political status as undetermined, a concept which gravely distorts history.

 

The theory of treating Taiwan’s political status as undetermined was a temporary tactic used by the United States in early 1950s to prevent Communist China from occupying Taiwan. Since 1954, when the United States re-established its embassy in Taipei, the theory has not been mentioned any longer. If there is any doubt of the status of Taiwan, then how come the ROC had been the permanent member of the U.N. Security Council for more than 20 years and maintained diplomatic ties with tens of countries? In 1979, when the United States switched its diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing, it had never denied that the Republic of China was a sovereign country; on the contrary, America has never supported the option of Taiwan independence.

 

Secondly, some versions of the curriculum guidelines try to “flatter Japan and smear China” by attributing Taiwan’s modernization to the Japanese colonial rule. The guidelines fail to mention the constructions of infrastructure by the Ching dynasty officials Shen Baozhen (1820-1879) and Liu Mingchuan (1836-1896) at the end of Qing dynasty. The students have learned that the Ching government signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki that ceded Taiwan to Japan, but they do not know the origin of the Sino-Japanese War. The narrow-minded and incomplete guidelines cannot teach students the overall understanding of the history. When it is routine to say that “Taiwan is an independent sovereign country,” and when President Tsai uses the term “Republic of China Taiwan,” it is obvious that the Pan-Green camp has employed political power to gradually seep the Taiwan independence mentality into the history education.

 

Education should be the basic process to nurture young students to understand a nation’s history, and it should not serve radical political purposes. Moreover, inaccurate contents should not be permitted to mislead the students regarding their true identification with their own country. And history education should not harm young students. The actions of the DPP administration run counter to the above principles and will harm the next generation. We should hurry up to vote the DPP government out of power.

From: https://www.chinatimes.com/opinion/20190901002362-262105?chdtv

 

September 3: Chen Ming-wen, a major legislator of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), left a suitcase containing $3 million NTD (about $97,000 USD) on a High Speed Rail train. The money is suspected to be political contribution. According to Chen, the money was to invest in his son’s start-up bubble tea store in the Philippines, but Chen’s explanation contains many inconsistencies. Chen has been reported to the prosecution for money laundering. Before investigation even initiated, Deputy Justice Minister Tsai Pi-chung argued publicly that there is no issue of money laundering with Chen. Public opinion has criticized Tsai for deliberately harboring his friend from legal responsibility.

 

September 3: Secretary-General Joshua Wong of Demosistō, a pro-democracy party in Hong Kong, visited Taiwan on September 3. Wong visited the DPP headquarters and various party caucuses in the Legislative Yuan, hoping that Taiwanese society would mobilize support for the anti-extradition law protests and enact a “Refugee Act” to support Hong Kong people. President Tsai Ing-wen stated that Taiwan supports the people of Hong Kong in pursuing freedom and democracy but will not intervene. The Executive Yuan stated that current laws are adequate to respond to the situation in Hong Kong. Until now, no one from Hong Kong has sought political asylum in Taiwan.

 

September 5: Former Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu was accused of abusing donation money following the 2014 gas explosion. Chen Chu, currently secretary-general to the president, has threatened to take legal action to prove her innocence. Councilwoman Lina Chen, also convener of the gas explosion investigation committee, pointed out that part of the donations was used to promote tourism, go abroad, et cetera, and not all funds were used towards disaster victims and disaster areas. The former mayor should provide a satisfactory explanation.

 

September 6: According to the Control Yuan, while National Taiwan University (NTU) President Kuan Chung-min served as a minister in the previous administration, Kuan wrote editorial columns for a media publication and received remuneration of $675,000 NTD (about $21,843 USD). The Public Functionary Disciplinary Sanction Commission gave Kuan an official reprimand for engaging in improper employment during his time in public office. While this sanction will not affect his qualification to serve as NTU president, the academic community generally finds these actions against Kuan to be political persecution. The Stability of Power Alliance filed a complaint with the Taipei District Prosecutors Office about the Control Yuan leaking information from the investigation.

 

September 8: According to a report by Reuters on September 5, Solomon Islands, Taiwan’s diplomatic ally in the Pacific, intends to establish diplomatic relations with mainland China. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that interactions with Solomon Islands are normal, and the country’s foreign minister visited Taiwan on September 8 and reiterated stable diplomatic ties. Since a new government in Solomon Islands took office in April, it has actively assessed the possibility of establishing relations with Beijing. Currently, the Republic of China (Taiwan) has 17 diplomatic allies. Taiwan and Solomon Islands have been diplomatic partners since 1983.

Taiwan Weekly is a newsletter released every week by Fair Winds Foundation, Taipei Forum, and Association of Foreign Relations that provides coverage and perspectives into the latest developments in Taiwan.

The conclusions and recommendations of any Taiwan Weekly article are solely those of its author(s), and do not reflect the views of the institutions that publish the newsletter.