Category: Taiwan

A dream deferred

From the Taipei Times Taiwan Quick Take section.

Academics from China and Taiwan will gather in Taipei next April to discuss ways to promote “exchanges” of the simplified and traditional Chinese characters that are used on each side of the Taiwan Strait. Liao Hsien-hao (廖咸浩), director of Taipei City’s Department of Cultural Affairs, said yesterday that some Chinese academics are calling for “restoring” the use of traditional characters in China since the historical background for adopting the simplified characters has changed. In the face of changes in information technology, he said, both sides should take a practical and scientific attitude toward Chinese characters.

Here’s my idea of a perfect compromise: China brings back simplified traditional characters, and Taiwan adopts the mainland’s Hanyu pinyin system for romanization, and bans all of the various gibberish versions used throughout the ROC.

ROC Armed Forces English Manual

Earlier today I bought two neat old booklets from an old man on the sidewalk just outside Taiwan National History Museum.

Both books are from the same series, published by the Republic of China Military Foreign Language school in 1965.

As you can see from the table of contents, the range of material is a little different from the typical English textbook.

As you may expect from a language textbook published by the military of a fascist government, there is a certain amount of propaganda. For example, a sample sentence for the phrase”come from” is:

The refugees all come from the mainland.

Most the “humorous stories” are also demonstrations of the evils of Communism.

Budapest schoolteacher “What is the cause of the increase of population here in our capital city?”
Pupil: “The population increases because the people from the country flock to town.” Teacher: “Now think carefully, children. What could be done to prevent the influx of the country population?”

Pupil: We could set up collective farms here, too”

And a history lesson:

The arrival of Soviet “technicians” in Cuba brought forth this story from that Communist-dominated island:

A Cuban pupil in a local school was asked by his teacher: “Pepito, who was Napoleon?” “That’s easy,” the boy replied. “He was a technician who left Francee to help Italy, Egypt and lots of countries.”

What you might not expect is that the quality of the English is often very poor. Bold marks the phrase they are trying to explain.

At the same time he will do it if you pay him some money.

The very day at his marriage.

We have lived together for that time on. [The other example correctly says “from that time on.”)

It is better for a woman to marry a man who loves her not a man she loves.

When you’re very lucky, you can even find propaganda and poor English in the same text sample.

Why is the statement that the Principle of Nationality is equivalent to the doctrine of the state is applicable in China but not in the West?

Answer: The statement that the Principle of Nationality is equivalent to the doctrine of the state is applicable in China but not in the West? For the reason that China, since the Ch’in and Han dynasties, has been developing a single state out of a single race, while foreign countries have developed many states from one race and have included many nationalities within one state.

Photos from Penghu

You might not know it from looking at my blog or flickr page, but I have been continuing to take photographs regularly. I’ve even bought a new lense (Canon 1.8F 50mm) and the DXO software package, an amazing piece of software that takes the photos from your digital SLR camera and processes them using algorithms that correct for most of the optical defects introduced in the interaction between your camera body and particular lense that you were using. Later on I’ll post a couple of before and after images to show off how amazing this program really is.

In the meantime, I’ve just uploaded a new gallery of 26 images from my August trip to Penghu. Those 26 were chosen out of about 300, and here I’ll post just the best few out of the 26 I put on flickr. As usual, click the image for the fullsize version.


The harbor of one of the smaller inhabited islands, taken from the boat.


Penghu is located between Taiwan and the Chinese mainland, a natural place to put a military base. Here are some soldiers eating breakfast in the town market area.


Just the side of a building.


This is the main intersection of one of the remote island villages. Quite a change of pace from Taipei.


The the only building on this tiny beach island. It was apparently the location of a lousy soap opera called “Dolphin Bay,” now used as a tourist site.


While the more heavily visited side of the abovementioned islet is a beautiful sandy beach, the opposite side is a rocky, desolate, alien landscape. I took a number of closeup photos like this one, in which the tiny sea creatures actually look like aliens.

The future of China (or, exactly what is realist?)

That Tom Barnett interview I mentioned is creating some dissension within our cousin blog Coming Anarchy.

The authors of CA (correction: two of them), as you might know, are fans of Barnett, but bigger fans of Robert Kaplan (hence the title). Barnett and Kaplan are divided on how the U.S. should deal with China, and their divide really represents two views that are fighting for prevalence in Washington.

Kaplan’s view, which is more in line with official Defense Department policy since the Cold War (and also gets lots of nods on the Japanese right), is that China is an emerging military threat that the U.S. has to contain with ships, airplanes, and missiles. Barnett’s view is that the U.S. has to become partners with China, as the economies of the two countries dictate, rather than let political concerns screw up the countries’ mostly-beneficial symbiosis.

Which view prevails will necessarily determine the future of U.S. policy toward Taiwan. A Kaplan view means that the U.S. has to defend Taiwanese sovereignty at all costs, as a roadblock to Chinese ambition in the Pacific. A Barnett view leads to the U.S. maintaining the status quo in Taiwan until the two countries can be united without force, either through incorporation in a democratic China or as part of a larger EU-style Asian community.

It hurts to admit this, because I’ve been a Taiwan supporter for some time now, but Barnett has a good point. Is it worth it to antagonize China when the U.S. is dependent on China and China is dependent on the U.S.? Wouldn’t it be easier if both countries could focus resources on their own problems, rather than needlessly breathe down each other’s throats? Do we really need to be bracing for World War III right now?

These are all tough questions that Bush and Rumsfeld should be asking themselves. Perhaps the best answer is to do as Barnett advises: maintain the status quo until China and Taiwan have evolved to the point where they can discuss their differences without threatening to lob bombs at each other. I think this is more likely to happen if and when we see closer business ties and more transparent democracy on both sides.

Good going CKS

A professor from Australia’s Monash University has a piece in the Sunday edition of Taipei Times that confirms what I’d always suspected about Taiwan’s ostracization from the international community. Namely, that it was all Chiang Kai Shek’s fault.

Chiang lost the ROC its UN seat

n mid-1971, the US and other countries began to push for a “dual representation” solution. The Australian ambassador to Taipei, Hugh Dunn, wrote on June 4, 1971, to then Minister of Foreign Affairs Chow Shu-kai (周書楷): “What we would see as a desirable finish is that the People’s Republic take over the Security Council seat, and that Taiwan remains on as a member, an ordinary member, of the UN … If the UN recognizes the PRC instead of the ROC as occupying the Chinese seat, and nothing else is done, Taiwan would be out in the cold. We wouldn’t favor that resolution.”

Chow showed some willingness to adjust to the new situation. When talking to the Japanese ambassador to Taipei, he said: “Although I have no way to approve of it and under the circumstances must express my opposition, we could tolerate its existence.” The English phrase, “We can live with it,” is added to the Chinese text.

In an “absolutely secret” secret document dated Aug. 3, 1971, the ministry laid out the options and Taiwan’s preferences. The first preference was that the “important question” motion be passed, which meant that the PRC would require a two-thirds vote to be admitted. The second preference was “dual recognition.” But even at this late moment, after more than 20 years of rejecting any alternative to “one China,” the Nationalist authorities would not openly embrace dual recognition.

So back in 1971 the USA, France, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and possibly other countries were all ready to support a motion granting the Republic of China (aka Taiwan) independent membership in the UN simultaneous with the recognition of the People’s Republic of China (aka Red China/Mainland China) as the holders of the Security Council seat. From today’s perspective, at a time in which the PRC’s economic, political, and military power is rising fast it we forget how powerless they really were back then – isolated internationally far more than Taiwan is today, their economy and social structure devastated by the Cultural Revolution. Had the ROC/Taiwan government actually put its support behind a two nation, dual representation structure at that time, China would have had absolutely no chance of opposing them, and the absurd fiction of the ‘one China policy’ would have never gotten off the ground.

Bush to meet with Godless heathen?

Today the Taipei Times is running a story with the headline: “Dalai Lama to visit Bush ahead of his trip to China.”

So, I start wondering: Would Bush really meet with the Dalai Lama this close to his first official visit to China? We all know how snarky the Chinese can get when you provoke them. (And the Japanese may as well forget about restarting talks over the East China Sea dispute.)

Before I could go any further, I’ve got the link open only to discover:

Tibet’s spiritual leader the Dalai Lama is to make a high-profile 10-day visit to Washington next month, during which he is expected to meet with US President George W. Bush, a rights group said.

Rights group? Oh, you must mean the International Campaign for Tibet, the organization that keeps President Bush’s schedule.

The article contines:

The 70-year-old Dalai Lama’s itinerary during the Washington visit beginning Nov. 8 “anticipates likely meetings with US President George Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other key Congressional leaders,” the International Campaign for Tibet said in a statement.

After finishing the article, I noticed it was a feed from AFP, so I ran a Yahoo! News search. Turns out all the other outlets who ran the AFP story ran it under the headline, “Dalai Lama set for high profile Washington visit, may meet Bush.”

Google and Taiwanese sovereignty

I originally started writing this post in response to this post on Ridingsun and never quite got around to finishing it, but now that Google has announced they are changing their designation of Taiwan from “Taiwan, province of China” to merely “Taiwan,” I figure I’ll just publish it.

The official US position is stated in the Taiwan Relations Act, passed in 1979, and has never been changed since.

Don’t forget Taiwan’s government is still known as the Republic Of China, and according to its constitution still considers itself a claimant to sovereignty over all of China, of which Taiwan is just a single province.

If you look at the actual text of the ROC constitution, Article 2 states
“The president and the vice president shall be directly elected by the entire populace of the free area of the Republic of China.”

By limiting voting to the populace of the “free area”, i.e. Taiwan and the surrounding islands, the implication is that mainland China is “unfree territory of the Republic of China.”

Article 11 also states
“Rights and obligations between the people of the Chinese mainland area and those of the free area, and the disposition of other related affairs may be specified by law.”
again, making clear that Taiwan still legally considers itself part of China (although apparently the best part).

If constitutional interpretation is too dry, you can follow the reasoning at the blog Those Who Dare.

Or simpler yet, they can just look at the vehicular traffic on Taiwan’s roads and take note of the license plates that read Taiwan Province.

Yes, the current president’s party (I hesitate to say ‘ruling party’ since they control oly a single branch of the government, all branches of which are basically stuck in deadlock due to partisan bickering) endorses formal independence from China, but unless they succeed in revising the constitution and changing the country’s official name, it’s very unrealistic to expect foreign businesses to do so.

Incidentally, I would be thrilled to see the ROC officially change its name to Republic of Taiwan, so don’t think that I’m actually in favor of reunification. Just try and realize this isn’t just a matter of Taiwan’s independence not being recognized internationally, it stil isn’t even recognized domestically.

Great article on history of Taiwan’s architecture

The Governor-General Hot Springs

During the onsen’s construction, Japan invaded China after the Marco Polo Bridge Incident of 1937. The Japanese authorities urged Taiwanese to use bricks in camouflage colors to hinder air raids. These colors–light green, beige, and brown–were often used from the late 1920s through the early 1940s. A kiln in Peitou specially produced bricks of these colors, known as “13-channel bricks” for their rippled surface, designed to reduce buildings’ visibility to enemy aircraft by reducing the bricks’ reflectiveness.

Representative buildings from that period include Taipei City Hall (now Zhongshan Hall), Taipei High School (now National Taiwan Normal University), and Taipei Imperial University (now National Taiwan University). Those buildings were all the work of Ide Kaoru, the influential chief architect of the Governor-General’s Office who advocated “localization” of Taiwan’s architecture. As the Governor-General Onsen was built with the same sort of green 13-channel bricks as the Taipei City Hall, which was completed in 1936 and was also a public building, it is assumed that Ide had a hand in its design.

This article is highly recommended, particularly for language students, as the text is presented in English, Japanese, and both simplified and traditional Chinese.

Taipei rescued from demons

Railway uses `feng shui’

The main entrance of Taipei Railway Station has been redesigned for better feng shui following a string of derailments and train delays, a railway official said over the weekend. Taiwan Railway Administration director Hsu Ta-wen (徐達文) said the administration had added a glass hallway to the station’s main entrance to ward off evil spirits.

The renovation was made at the suggestion of Master Hun Yuan (混元禪師), a well-known Buddhist master, Hsu said. The railway administration consulted Hun Yuan after several derailments, train delays and suicides on the tracks. Hun Yuan said the incidents had occurred because the station’s main entrance faces a “white tiger demon.” To avoid the demon, the main door had to be moved back 6m. The administration installed a glass hallway behind the main door, so that passengers now arriving at the station must enter two doors. Several lawmakers on Friday blasted the administration for squandering money on “superstition.”

All I have to say to those doubtful politicians is, wait until the demons start wreaking havoc in your home, then see how you feel about calling in the exorcists. Just look at this AP story from Cambodia.

HNOM PENH, Cambodia – Black magic may have driven a Cambodian couple to bite off their daughter’s thumb nails and suck her blood, officials said Sunday.

Chheng Chhorn, 46, and Srun Yoeung, 37, attacked their 12-year-old child before dawn on Thursday while she was still asleep, biting off her thumb nails and a small part of her nose to drink her blood, said Keo Norea Phy, a police official in Kampong Cham province where the incident occurred.

Neighbors rushed to the couple’s house and rescued the girl after hearing her screams, he said.

After treatment at a hospital in Kampong Cham, about 50 miles east of Phom Penh, the girl was placed in the custody of other villagers. Relatives had taken her parents to a black magic healer to chase away the evil spirit that was believed to have possessed them, the police official said.

“We, the police, just have no idea what offense to charge them with,” Keo Norea Phy said.

Preap Nhim, a local official, said the couple sold noodles in their village and had never before acted in a strange manner. He said they may have been driven by the spirit guarding the altar they kept inside their house.

Cambodia is a Buddhist country, but many people in the countryside are deeply superstitious. Some claim the ability to communicate with the dead and cure the sick by exorcising evil spirits from their bodies.

I think the truth is clear. Obviously there is a pro-demon faction in the Taipei Municipal government, trying to sabotage the geomantic wards that are the only thing keeping their dark masters at bay. Luckily, they’ve been thwarted, and Taipei is once again safe from the bloodthirsty tiger demon…for now.

Taiwan, Amtrak and the ISO

I just mentioned that the editor of the CIA world factbook seems to consider Taiwan an oddly stateless territory. This makes a little more sense if you read about why Amtrak recently changed Taiwan’s entry in their website’s country selection form from “Taiwan, province of China” to merely “Taiwan.”

In the letter, the FAPA pointed out that in a 1996 memorandum, the US State Department stated that since the US has no diplomatic relations with the Republic of China, US officials need to refer to Taiwan as “Taiwan.”

Amtrak was established by the US Congress and receives funding from the government, therefore, what they do should be in accordance with the rules set by the government, the letter said.

According to the article, Amtrak changed their website in response to a letter of complaint written by Wu Ming-chi (吳明基), president of Formosan Association for Public Affairs.

“I was informed that Amtrak takes no position regarding the sovereignty of Taiwan and simply lists all countries around the world according to ISO 3166-1 provided by the International Organization for Standardization, which does not list Taiwan as a province of China”, said Wu Ming-chi (吳明基), president of FAPA in the letter.

The funny thing is, he has his facts completely wrong. If you actually look at ISO 3166-1 on the ISO web site, you’ll see that they DO list Taiwan as “TAIWAN, PROVINCE OF CHINA!” Whatever the US government policy on Taiwan’s name is, it’s a little funny that Amtrak responded to a complaint that didn’t even correctly cite the International Standard Organization’s name for the country. In fact, the FAPA website even contains a letter of complaint written to the ISO about this very issue, written by the same man who had claimed in a different complaint that the ISO has NOT referred to Taiwan as a province of China! And I just noticed that both letters were written ON THE SAME DAY! I think my head is spinning.

July 18, 2005

Masami Tanaka, President
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56
CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland

Dear Mr. Tanaka:

I write to you today to express my serious concern about the ISO 3166-1standard which lists Taiwan as a province of China. This issue has caused strong feelings on the part of Taiwanese around the world. I therefore urge you strongly to correct this factual error.

I understand that ISO seeks to stay politically neutral and uses UN sources when developing the ISO standard 3166-1. As stated in the FAQ section on your ISO website, “the printed edition of the [U.N.] publication Country and Region Codes for Statistical Use gives the name we use in ISO 3166-1.” However, I would like to point out that the UN Country and Region Codes for Statistical Use does not list Taiwan at all – let alone lists Taiwan as a “province of China.” (See: the on-line version of the Country and Region Codes for Statistical Use on the UN website. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49alpha.htm) Moreover, the FAQ section from your website adds that, “since Taiwan is not a UN member it does not figure in the UN bulletin on country names.” Thus, there is no source for the use of such misinformed
labeling as “Taiwan, Province of China.”

In addition to the validity of the source the ISO uses when referring to Taiwan, we would also like to point out that it is incontestable reality that Taiwan is not a part of China. All this, despite China’s political claims to the contrary. Taiwan is a de facto sovereign nation
that democratically elects its own president and government officials. The Communist government in China has never exercised any jurisdiction over Taiwan since it was established in 1949. If the ISO intends to stay politically neutral, as it prides itself of, labeling Taiwan as a province of China, simply because China says so, would constitute a double standard.

I urge the ISO to revise the 3166-1 standard and eliminate the term “Province of China” from its listing of Taiwan.

Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you.

Cordially yours,

Dr. Ming-chi Wu, Ph.D., President
Formosan Association for Public Affairs

I think that if Dr Ming-chi Wu wants his complaints to be taken seriously in the future, he should start by keeping his own facts straight.

(Thanks to Michael Turton’s blog for pointing out the Amtrak article.)