Jenna Cody :

Is Taiwan a real China?
No, and with the exception of a few intervening decades - here’s the part that’ll surprise you - it never has been.

This’ll blow your mind too: that it never has been doesn’t matter.

So let’s start with what doesn’t actually matter.

Until the 1600s, Taiwan was indigenous. Indigenous Taiwanese are not Chinese, they’re Austronesian. Then it was a Dutch colony (note: I do not say “it was Dutch”, I say it was a Dutch colony). Then it was taken over by Ming loyalists at the end of the Ming dynasty (the Ming loyalists were breakaways, not a part of the new Qing court. Any overlap in Ming rule and Ming loyalist conquest of Taiwan was so brief as to be inconsequential).

Only then, in the late 1600s, was it taken over by the Chinese (Qing). But here’s the thing, it was more like a colony of the Qing, treated as - to use Emma Teng’s wording in Taiwan’s Imagined Geography - a barrier or barricade keeping the ‘real’ Qing China safe. In fact, the Qing didn’t even want Taiwan at first, the emperor called it “a ball of mud beyond the pale of civilization”. Prior to that, and to a great extent at that time, there was no concept on the part of China that Taiwan was Chinese, even though Chinese immigrants began moving to Taiwan under Dutch colonial rule (mostly encouraged by the Dutch, to work as laborers). When the Spanish landed in the north of Taiwan, it was the Dutch, not the Chinese, who kicked them out.

Under Qing colonial rule - and yes, I am choosing my words carefully - China only controlled the Western half of Taiwan. They didn’t even have maps for the eastern half. That’s how uninterested in it they were. I can’t say that the Qing controlled “Taiwan”, they only had power over part of it.

Note that the Qing were Manchu, which at the time of their conquest had not been a part of China: China itself essentially became a Manchu imperial holding, and Taiwan did as well, once they were convinced it was not a “ball of mud” but actually worth taking. Taiwan was not treated the same way as the rest of “Qing China”, and was not administered as a province until (I believe) 1887. So that’s around 200 years of Taiwan being a colony of the Qing.

What happened in the late 19th century to change China’s mind? Japan. A Japanese ship was shipwrecked in eastern Taiwan in the 1870s, and the crew was killed by hostile indigenous people in what is known as the Mudan Incident. A Japanese emissary mission went to China to inquire about what could be done, only to be told that China had no control there and if they went to eastern Taiwan, they did so at their own peril. China had not intended to imply that Taiwan wasn’t theirs, but they did. Japan - and other foreign powers, as France also attempted an invasion - were showing an interest in Taiwan, so China decided to cement its claim, started mapping the entire island, and made it a province.

So, I suppose for a decade or so Taiwan was a part of China. A China that no longer exists.

It remained a province until 1895, when it was ceded to Japan after the (first) Sino-Japanese War. Before that could happen, Taiwan declared itself a Republic, although it was essentially a Qing puppet state (though the history here is interesting - correspondence at the time indicates that the leaders of this ‘Republic of Taiwan’ considered themselves Chinese, and the tiger flag hints at this as well. However, the constitution was a very republican document, not something you’d expect to see in Qing-era China.) That lasted for less than a year, when the Japanese took it by force.

This is important for two reasons - the first is that some interpretations of IR theory state that when a colonial holding is released, it should revert to the state it was in before it was taken as a colony. In this case, that would actually be The Republic of Taiwan, not Qing-era China. Secondly, it puts to rest all notions that there was no Taiwan autonomy movement prior to 1947.

In any case, it would be impossible to revert to its previous state, as the government that controlled it - the Qing empire - no longer exists. The current government of China - the PRC - has never controlled it.

After the Japanese colonial era, there is a whole web of treaties and agreements that do not satisfactorily settle the status of Taiwan. None of them actually do so - those which explicitly state that Taiwan is to be given to the Republic of China (such as the Cairo declaration) are non-binding. Those that are binding do not settle the status of Taiwan (neither the treaty of San Francisco nor the Treaty of Taipei definitively say that Taiwan is a part of China, or even which China it is - the Treaty of Taipei sets out what nationality the Taiwanese are to be considered, but that doesn’t determine territorial claims). Treaty-wise, the status of Taiwan is “undetermined”.

Under more modern interpretations, what a state needs to be a state is…lessee…a contiguous territory, a government, a military, a currency…maybe I’m forgetting something, but Taiwan has all of it. For all intents and purposes it is independent already.

In fact, in the time when all of these agreements were made, the Allied powers weren’t as sure as you might have learned about what to do with Taiwan. They weren’t a big fan of Chiang Kai-shek, didn’t want it to go Communist, and discussed an Allied trusteeship (which would have led to independence) or backing local autonomy movements (which did exist). That it became what it did - “the ROC” but not China - was an accident (as Hsiao-ting Lin lays out in Accidental State).

In fact, the KMT knew this, and at the time the foreign minister (George Yeh) stated something to the effect that they were aware they were ‘squatters’ in Taiwan.

Since then, it’s true that the ROC claims to be the rightful government of Taiwan, however, that hardly matters when considering the future of Taiwan simply because they have no choice. To divest themselves of all such claims (and, presumably, change their name) would be considered by the PRC to be a declaration of formal independence. So that they have not done so is not a sign that they wish to retain the claim, merely that they wish to avoid a war.

It’s also true that most Taiwanese are ethnically “Han” (alongside indigenous and Hakka, although Hakka are, according to many, technically Han…but I don’t think that’s relevant here). But biology is not destiny: what ethnicity someone is shouldn’t determine what government they must be ruled by.

Through all of this, the Taiwanese have evolved their own culture, identity and sense of history. They are diverse in a way unique to Taiwan, having been a part of Austronesian and later Hoklo trade routes through Southeast Asia for millenia. Now, one in five (I’ve heard one in four, actually) Taiwanese children has a foreign parent. The Taiwanese language (which is not Mandarin - that’s a KMT transplant language forced on Taiwanese) is gaining popularity as people discover their history. Visiting Taiwan and China, it is clear where the cultural differences are, not least in terms of civic engagement. This morning, a group of legislators were removed after a weekend-long pro-labor hunger strike in front of the presidential palace. They were not arrested and will not be. Right now, a group of pro-labor protesters is lying down on the tracks at Taipei Main Station to protest the new labor law amendments.

This would never be allowed in China, but Taiwanese take it as a fiercely-guarded basic right.

*

Now, as I said, none of this matters.

What matters is self-determination. If you believe in democracy, you believe that every state (and Taiwan does fit the definition of a state) that wants to be democratic - that already is democratic and wishes to remain that way - has the right to self-determination. In fact, every nation does. You cannot be pro-democracy and also believe that it is acceptable to deprive people of this right, especially if they already have it.

Taiwan is already a democracy. That means it has the right to determine its own future. Period.

Even under the ROC, Taiwan was not allowed to determine its future. The KMT just arrived from China and claimed it. The Taiwanese were never asked if they consented. What do we call it when a foreign government arrives in land they had not previously governed and declares itself the legitimate governing power of that land without the consent of the local people? We call that colonialism.

Under this definition, the ROC can also be said to be a colonial power in Taiwan. They forced Mandarin - previously not a language native to Taiwan - onto the people, taught Chinese history, geography and culture, and insisted that the Taiwanese learn they were Chinese - not Taiwanese (and certainly not Japanese). This was forced on them. It was not chosen. Some, for awhile, swallowed it. Many didn’t. The independence movement only grew, and truly blossomed after democratization - something the Taiwanese fought for and won, not something handed to them by the KMT.

So what matters is what the Taiwanese want, not what the ROC is forced to claim. I cannot stress this enough - if you do not believe Taiwan has the right to this, you do not believe in democracy.

And poll after poll shows it: Taiwanese identify more as Taiwanese than Chinese (those who identify as both primarily identify as Taiwanese, just as I identify as American and Armenian, but primarily as American. Armenian is merely my ethnicity). They overwhelmingly support not unifying with China. The vast majority who support the status quo support one that leads to eventual de jure independence, not unification. The status quo is not - and cannot be - an endgame (if only because China has declared so, but also because it is untenable). Less than 10% want unification. Only a small number (a very small minority) would countenance unification in the future…even if China were to democratize.

The issue isn’t the incompatibility of the systems - it’s that the Taiwanese fundamentally do not see themselves as Chinese.

A change in China’s system won’t change that. It’s not an ethnic nationalism - there is no ethnic argument for Taiwan (or any nation - didn’t we learn in the 20th century what ethnicity-based nation-building leads to? Nothing good). It’s not a jingoistic or xenophobic nationalism - Taiwanese know that to be dangerous. It’s a nationalism based on shared identity, culture, history and civics. The healthiest kind of nationalism there is. Taiwan exists because the Taiwanese identify with it. Period.

There are debates about how long the status quo should go on, and what we should risk to insist on formal recognition. However, the question of whether or not to be Taiwan, not China…

…well, that’s already settled.

The Taiwanese have spoken and they are not Chinese.

Whatever y’all think about that doesn’t matter. That’s what they want, and if you believe in self-determination you will respect it.

If you don’t, good luck with your authoritarian nonsense, but Taiwan wants nothing to do with it.

#Opinion by Tsang Chi-ho 曾志豪｜"How would commemorating an alumnus ruin the university’s reputation? What if the students were commemorating a hero of the Second Sino-Japanese War? Or a martyr in the War to Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea? Or people’s great leader Chairman Mao Zedong? Would this activity be ruining the university’s reputation? Would the students be punished?"

Read more: https://bit.ly/39q3qHb

"科技大學的學生，在科技大學舉行集會悼念科技大學的同學周梓樂，原來是「有損校譽」。原來科技大學的同學希望為科技大學的同學討回公道、喚起社會關注、追尋真相，這一切行為，居然在校方眼中是，「有損校譽」。"
____________
📱Download the app:
http://onelink.to/appledailyapp
📰 Latest news:
http://appledaily.com/engnews/
🐤 Follow us on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/appledaily_hk
💪🏻 Subscribe and show your support:
https://bit.ly/2ZYKpHP

#AppleDailyENG

China’s “New Squabbling Situation” (Lee Yee)

Yesterday, I mentioned that the US deterred the Soviet Union’s intention to employ nuclear weapons to attack China’s military base in 1969, and since then implemented a half-century policy of interactions with China. Although the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has always said that “the US will never give up their ambition to destroy our nation,” looking back at history, even when the Eight-Nation Alliance invaded China in the nineteenth century, the US did not make territorial claims from the Qing empire. Instead, it advocated “open doors to share the benefits equally” to avoid China being carved up. The US’ share of the Boxer’s indemnity has been gradually paid back through the training of Chinese talents and the studying of Chinese students in the US. The Rockefeller Foundation founded the Peking Union Medical College (PUMCH) in 1917, the predecessor of Tsinghua University, bringing modern western medicine into China. When the Second Sino-Japanese War broke out, a veteran American military aviator Claire Lee Chennault was hired as an aviation adviser and trainer in China. He organized the First American Volunteer Group (AVG) of the Republic of China Air Force, nicknamed the Flying Tigers, and assisted China in fighting against the Japanese in World War II.

In response to the anti-China speech given by the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, a mainland Chinese netizen commented, “you needed education, they gave you Tsinghua University; you needed medical care, they gave you PUMCH; you needed to fight against Japan, they gave you the Flying Tigers; you needed to oppose the Soviet Union, they gave you a platform; you needed to open up, they gave you foreign funding; you needed trade, they gave you a trade surplus...You say that they have an endless ambition to destroy your nation, they will give it a try!” This is a very vivid description of how Sino-US relations have evolved so far.

Just a few days before Pompeo delivered his “Communist China and the Free World’s Future” speech, Chinese State Councilor and Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi also gave a long speech at the inaugural ceremony of the Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy Studies Centre on July 20. The speech was titled, “Study and Implement Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy Conscientiously and Break New Ground in Major-Country Diplomacy with Chinese Characteristics." I share the URL here ( https://www.sohu.com/a/408705618_99900926 ) and strongly recommend readers to browse this masterpiece. Let’s see if anyone can tell me after reading it, what is the content of Wang’s three to four thousand words on “Xi’s Thought on Diplomacy,” and what specific facts were there about “breaking new ground in major-country diplomacy.” Nowadays, the daily news is about Western countries’ policies, acts, and speeches directed at China and Hong Kong. Mainland netizens have recently lined up the front-page headlines of the Chinese internal newspaper “Reference News,” and they were all, “China condemns…, China warns the UK…, China is resolute to fight back…” This is not at all a new diplomatic situation but a new squabbling situation.”

After reading Wang’s speech, why not make a comparison to see if this Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs, who has the same ranking as the US Secretary of State, is of the same caliber and merit as Pompeo? Then you will understand why the US now refuses to restart dialogue with China and only looks at China’s actions.

Looking at the successive Chinese foreign ministers after the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, with the exception of the time during the Cultural Revolution, Zhou Enlai, Chen Yi to Qian Qichen were all decent. I still remember that after the breakthrough in Sino-US relations in 1971, the New York Times columnist James Reston visited Zhou Enlai in China and their battle of words was brilliant. Why does the current foreign minister only speak empty words but know not what they are?

Of course, this is related to the current situation in China for the apotheosis of the core leader. In addition to the unknown “Xi Jinping’s Thought on Diplomacy,” there will be “Xi Jinping’s Thought on Economics, Education, Military…” one after another.

A netizen quoted Wang’s speech and left a comment, “Brown-nosing is linguistic corruption and spiritual bribery...The giver only has to expend dignity and cunning with words, and the recipient is rewarded with personality and public interests. It is consensual for both giver and taker, and they usually have a tacit understanding where they jointly commit an ugly conspiracy...In a totalitarian society, brown-nosing is a multiple outbreak and refractory Covid-19. After an organized and large-scale epidemic, it will eventually become an incurable disease of personality cult detrimental to the entire nation and society.”

German Protestant theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer said that “the nature of folly is a moral rather than an intellectual defect.” I believe this moral defect stems from a totalitarian system. When power becomes absolute, all those in power at various levels will, as Lu Xun said, “fawn upon their superiors and be overbearing upon those below.” The regime causes those with authority to never hear the true voice, how is this not stupid?

The World has helped China immensely in the past, saving China from outright domination from Japan, saving China's economy through investment and trade but what does China do in return???

For a deeper dive into China's Propaganda influence and soft power, watch our liveshow ADVPodcasts: https://www.youtube.com/advpodcasts

DOCUMENTARY LINKS:
Conquering Southern China:
https://vimeo.com/ondemand/conqueringsouthernchina

Conquering Northern China:
https://vimeo.com/ondemand/conqueringnorthernchina

Stay Awesome China (my new documentary): https://vimeo.com/ondemand/stayawesomechina

For Motorcycle adventures around the world, and a talk-show on two wheels go to ADVChina every Monday 1pm EST
https://www.youtube.com/advchina

For a realistic perspective on China and world travel from an American father and a Chinese mother with two half-Chinese daughters go to Laowhy86 every Wednesday 1pm EST
https://youtu.be/mErixa-YIJE

For a no-nonsense on the street look at Chinese culture and beyond from China's original YouTuber, join SerpentZA on Friday at 1pm EST
https://www.youtube.com/serpentza

Support Sasha and I on Patreon: http://www.patreon.com/serpentza
Join me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/winstoninchina
Twitter: @serpentza
Instagram: serpent_za


moving to china adv china
us china australia china china economy

Mattㄟ粉絲專頁 ►
https://goo.gl/e148I4
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
想加入一起玩？►
PS4ID: MattHuang850813 (如果我在線上可以直接加進來，時間沒有固定)
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
更多《戰地風雲5》發售前必看的新資訊！► https://goo.gl/J8C87m
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
以後不寫內容了，有興趣我用的畫面或音樂可以私訊粉專喔！

Remains number 1 plate manufacturing plant Takatori D51

Steam locomotive movement "D51" is Takatori former Japan National Railways in Suma Ward, Kobe City on October 13, 1938 (now JR Takatori) is made as the No. 1 factory, active in the main trunk of the West, the distance covered is 1.8 million km

211 No. D51, 1938 (1938) inaugurated the 13th October. And also the production of a new engine factory also within the ministry railway increased production of engine manufacturers due to the Sino-Japanese war, the factory Takatori is starting with No. 211, the 1943 (1943) tanks a total of 60 during the year The D51 is the birth of form. Of course, some time ago, "serial number 1940, 26 factories and the Ministry of Railways Takatori" oval plate has been restored, also the No. 498 D51 Takatori born. Friends work Okita Yuu "table locomotive" (database Appendix No. 300 ours), according to the completed D51 No. 211 is located in District Authority Himeji 23 month thereafter, and moved to Nara → Turtle → Nara → Umekouzi → Suita However, his life, 1971 charge of the factory without having to leave the area Takatori (1971) has been scrapped in the May 04 date was the stored static here in Kobe Oji Zoo
1.8 million km

鷹取工場製造番号１番の銘板が残るＤ51

動蒸気機関車「D51」は、昭和13年10月13日神戸市須磨区の旧国鉄鷹取 (現在JR鷹取)工場で第1号機として製作され、西日本の主要幹線で活躍し、 走破した距離は180万キロ

Ｄ51 211号機は1938（昭和13）年10月13日の落成。日中戦争にともなう車輌メーカーの生産量増加で鉄道省内の工場でも機関車を新製することとなり、鷹取工場ではこの211号機を皮切りに、1943（昭和18）年までの間に合計60輌のＤ51形が誕生しています。もちろん先般「鉄道省　鷹取工場　昭和 15年　製造番号26」の楕円形銘板が復元されたＤ51 498号機も鷹取生まれです。沖田祐作さんの「機関車表」（本誌300号付録データベース）によれば、落成したＤ51 211号機は同月23日に姫路機関区に配置、以後、吹田→梅小路→奈良→亀山→奈良と移動したものの、終生、鷹取工場の受け持ち範囲を出ることなく 1971（昭和46）年５月４日付けで廃車され、ここ神戸市の王子動物園に静態保存されました
良→亀山→奈良と移動したものの、終生、鷹取工場の受け持ち範囲を出ることなく 1971（昭和46）年５月４日付けで廃車され、ここ神戸市の王子動物園に静態保存されました