Return to Taiwan Aboriginal Rights
Webpage
"No Miracles Here"- An Introduction to the
Politics and Rights of the Aboriginal Peoples of
Introduction
The 350,000 Aboriginal people of
- A 1998 report showed that general mortality rates were 550 per 100,000 however the Aboriginal rates was 1123 per 100,000. " In Aboriginal areas, there is only one doctor for every 2,000 or 3,000 people, compared with one for every 800 people outside such areas." [3]
-Life expectancy statistics from 1986 show a life
expectancy at birth of 57 for Mountain Aborigines compared to the national
average of 72 and incomes 40% of the National average. [4]
This essay attempts to outline some issues about Taiwan’s
Aboriginal peoples in regards to international and domestic politics, as well
as provide a historical background for the reader.
Taiwan’s Aboriginal Peoples have been subject to colonisation processes
beginning 376 years ago. The remaining Taiwan First Nations are: Ami, Atayal,
Bunun, Paiwan, Puyuma, Saisiat, Sediq, Taroko, Thao, Tsou, Yami.
Some elements of the Plains Aboriginal peoples remain but they as distinctive
cultures and societies have virtually disappeared.
Background Historical Sketch
Over the last four centuries of colonialism
Before 1624 -
1624 to 1662- the Dutch occupied areas of
the western part of the island. Large scale
Chinese immigration began in this period.
Attempts by the Spanish to colonise the north of the island began in 1626 and
ended when they were defeated by the Dutch in 1642.
1662 to 1683 - The Dutch were defeated by the Ming Dynasty
Loyalist Koxinga (Jeng Cheng Gung). This regime marked the beginning of Chinese
governance of the
1683 to 1895 The Ching (Manchu) Dynasty treated
1895 to 1945-
.
Later occupied Aboriginal lands were subject to
hydroelectric development which provided cheap electricity to power
1945 to Present - Taiwan was given to Chiang Kai Shek’s
Kuomingtang (KMT) government for their cooperation against Japan in World War
II by Allies at the Cairo Conference in 1943. The KMT occupation began in late
1945. On
Taiwan’s Lack of Recognition and Taiwan’s First Nations:
International Geopolitical context
International politics have had very broad and unique implications to Taiwan’s
Aboriginal Peoples. Their situations are complicated and obscured by the pariah
status of the
An example of Aboriginals as backdoor diplomatic tool is
the Taiwan Canada Aboriginal Cultural Festival held in the spring of
1999. This festival was opened with an address by the premier of
Taiwan Vincent Siew which gives an indication of the importance attached to it
by the
International forums as has been used effectively by
Canada’s First Nations. For example the March 1999 condemnations of Canadian
government policies for it’s pursuit of extinguishment of Native title and
other things related to the International Covenant of Political and Social
Rights, discriminatory provisions of the Indian Act by were brought before the
UN by Canadian Aboriginal Women such as Sandra Lovelace etc. all exert moral
(though not legal) pressure on the Canadian government and have sometimes led
to progressive changes. However the People’s Republic of China has interfered
on several occasions sometimes successfully blocking Taiwan First Nations
attempts to participate in various international fora. This continued
interference lead delegates at an June 1999 International Aboriginal Rights
conference in Taipei to adopt the following resolution;
"That all the participants of the International Symposium on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples give support and solidarity to the Indigenous Peoples of
Taiwan to attend those forums and conferences which are attended by the world
family of Indigenous Peoples, to discuss those matters regarding Indigenous
Peoples and their communities and;
Furthermore we call upon those in authority to give support during this United
Nations decade of the Indigenous Peoples, to ensure Indigenous Peoples of
Taiwan join with the family of the worlds of Indigenous Peoples as they gather
at the United Nations and other International Fora." [12]
Access to more international forums would allow Taiwan
First Nations some much needed leverage against the national government. So the
Taiwan’s Aboriginal peoples have been buffeted by the
machinations of outside powers for the greater part of four centuries.
Today’s they are caught in the often troubled relations to between
Origins
The origins of Taiwan’s Aboriginal Peoples are a contentious and politically
charged issue due to the Taiwan’s Independence issue. If they are from what is
now PRC territory this is used as part of the "One China" rhetoric. If they are Malay-Polynesian or Ainu Aboriginal
people from
This is also useful in the marginalisation of Indigenous Rights because of
"the we all came from elsewhere" logic is
useful for rationalising conquest and resulting settler dominance. Taiwan’s
Rukai First Nation says that their ancestors descended from the hundred step
snake (species: Agkistrodon acutus). This in the author’s opinion is the most
valid since it makes clear that the Rukai are from this land and have reverence
for it. Given the massive environmental damage inflicted on
Land and Economic Development
Taiwan is an island of about 36,000 square kilometres and has 21.5 million
people making it the second most densely populated country in the world after
Bangladesh. Land rights are therefore a very contentious issue. Prior to
colonisation Taiwan Aboriginal peoples lived through hunting and shifting
agriculture.
During the Chinese colonial period, the subjugated First
Nations had a system of land rights, known as secondary rents, under the Ching
Dynasty. This was to maintain their loyalty so they could be used militarily
against the frequently rebellious Taiwanese Han settlers and against the still
independent First Nations. However this system of land rights was not that
effective and many
Aboriginals lost whatever title they had through debt, or fraud.
Taiwan was a marginal colonial frontier area in Ching policies and was to be maintained at minimal cost [13]Also the containment policies was a security measure to prevent Ming loyalists from using the rugged mountains as bases from which to launch rebellions against the Ching Dynasty which was considered a foreign government by many Han Chinese settlers.
Ching policies changed from containment to invasion in the mid 1800’s as populations pressures increased, and Western military actions against Eastern TFN challenged Chinese sovereignty claims over the whole of Taiwan. The Treaty of Tienjin (1858) which concluded the Second Opium War forced open some of Taiwan’s harbours to western traders anxious to purchase camphor, a lucrative export to the industrialising West. Camphor was used in a host of medicinal products as well celluloid, and explosives production. The trees from which it came grew abundantly on the lands of the mountain First Nations. These exports of camphor were ironically in part to pay for improvements to Taiwan’s defences against Western aggression. Aboriginal resistance against these incursions was vigorous and resulted the deaths of over 500 Chinese soldiers in 1886 and 400 in 1887 [14]. For example one engagement in this period saw Aboriginals in a night attack wipe out 180 Chinese soldiers save one servant boy who hid in some grass. As consequence of such determined resistance camphor exports plummeted fell from 1.23 million pounds in 1881 to 399 pounds in 1885[15] not recovering to these levels until some 5 years later.
Under Japanese occupation the Western Plains First Nations
lost the limited land rights that had existed under the Ching Dynasty. The
Eastern First Nations were subject to systematic invasion, and later of limited
settlement. However the often tenuous nature of Japanese control combined with
frequent nature of Aboriginal uprisings limited settlement considerably. Under
the Japanese the subjugated mountain First Nations had land usage rights but
not ownership.
In 1899 the Japanese colonial government made camphor a monopoly. The proceeds
from the camphor trade would account for over 10 percent of colonial revenues
in the early infrastructure development period of 1895 to 1905.[16]
Japanese Aboriginal policy was an improvised as they went along depending on the levels of Aboriginal resistance. In the north where resistance by the Taroko, Sediq, and Atayal Nations was strong, the Japanese used military expeditions and enforced blockades in attempts to restrict these First Nations’ access to gunpowder and firearms. Eventually a noose strategy was developed in which a "guardline" was systematically advanced through military means often related to camphor production demands. This guardline consisted of outposts at close regular intervals that were protected by electric fences, mines, barbed wire etc and connected by telephone. Movement across it was strictly controlled, "the sentinals have full permission to use their rifles whenever their challenge is disregarded. The line was advanced into the native territory whenever an opportunity arose, and then the inhabitant who had been ‘suppressed’ were then ‘tamed’…"[17] The last major uprising was by the Sediq Nation in 1930. The Japanese retaliation included the massacre of over 900 Sediq which included the use of poison gas, aerial bombing, artillery, and Aboriginal auxillaries from other tribes.
Subjugated tribes were subject to assimilation efforts including education in Japanese language and various other forced assimilation measures as well they were used in fighting the still independent Nations. Outside settlement was limited due in part to frequent Aboriginal uprisings despite of government incentives that began in the 1920s. Mass re-locations were an important part of the Japanese government pacification strategies. These involved forced relocation of remote villages to more controllable areas. Beginning in 1920 and lasting 15 years these eventually affected over half of the mountain dwelling Aboriginal people and caused considerable social upheaval and fragmentation among those involved. [18] After WWII the KMT government continued the Japanese policies of forced resettlement of remote villages to more controllable areas. The social upheaval caused has parallels with the forced re-locations of Canadian Aboriginal peoples by the government as described in the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.[19]
Upon gaining control of Taiwan in 1945 the KMT government "claimed" the forests and mountains thus making the Aborigines’ traditional way of life prohibited.[20] So woodcutting and hunting became forms of burglary in the government’s eyes. In short, many Aborigines’ traditional ways became illegal.
Furthermore under KMT occupation the First Nations lost much of their remaining lands to Chinese settlement, fraudulent or intentionally complex land registration procedures. As well the destruction of much of the old growth forests during the frenetic logging of the 1950s to 1970s seriously degraded much of their lands. For example Taiwan’s once plentiful deer were hunted to near extinction by the end of the 1960s.
Today the government officially states that over 240,000 hectares or some 240 square kilometers are reserved for ethnic peoples [21]. However title is retained by the government not the Aboriginal peoples. This represents a mere one or two percent of the 17000 or more square kilometers still held by Aboriginal peoples before the Japanese conquest began in 1895 [See map above historical view] Even on these remaining lands illegal occupation is widespread, and most areas of economic worth have been developed. [22]
The "Pingchuanhui" is a small but politically influential anti-aboriginal organisation representing the interests of Han Chinese landowners in the mountainous areas of Taiwan. It was formed in the 1980s in reaction to rising local Taiwan Aboriginal political power to protect their often illegal occupation of Aboriginal lands. It’s rhetoric includes describing Taiwan’s Aboriginals as the offspring of " ‘black dwarf’ or ‘bird-devil savage’ slave labourers" brought here by the Dutch and Spanish.[23]
Taiwan First Nation lands have been heavily exploited for hydroelectricity production, marble, cement, and tourism. For example Taiwan’s three of the top tourist attractions are Alishan Mountain on the lands of the Tsou Nation, the Taroko Gorge on the lands of the Taroko Nation, and Sun Moon Lake on lands of the Thao Nation. The Sun Moon Lake Hydropower Project supplied much of the electricity for Taiwan’s rapid industrialisation during the 1930 to 1960s. Today Aboriginal cultures are put on display at so-called Cultural parks.
Figure 2.
(TFNCoke.jpeg) Aboriginal peoples go better with Coke. Note the roller
coaster and Maya style temple in this exotic mishmash of a promotion voucher
for the
Industrialisation and colonisation have resulted in extensive environmental degradation and territory loss. The most extreme case being that of the Tao (Yami) Nation who have 200,000 often leaky barrels of nuclear waste contaminating their homeland of Lanyu Island which the 1997 Taiwan Human Rights Association Annual Report terms "environmental colonialism". [25]
The government still lays claim to all public lands in one way or another. Aboriginal farmers often work government allocated lands, a factor that weakens them since they are then dependent on government goodwill. The government holds control over large areas of former aboriginal territory. This land is supposed held in trust however the small amount of territory held by aboriginal Peoples indicates the contrary. Increasing pressure for vacation areas for the urban population and demands for greater gravel production etc. will place further demands on their traditional lands. An example of this is the construction of 12 new Gulf courses along the East Coast as part of a "development" plan along with the construction of four lane highway all done without aboriginal input into the decision processes but such is the KMT way with regards to Taiwan’s Aboriginal Peoples.
Another telling example of the political economy of
aboriginal land rights is the case of
An quick
glance at some financial figures suggests why Asia Cement’s long term illegal
occupation of Taroko First Nation lands is completely ignored in the mass
media. Asia Cements’ "tycoon" owner is listed #188 with assets of
$US2.6 billion on the Forbes list of top 500 richest men [27] "At the end
of 1998, Far Eastern's 94 companies, including six listed on the Taiwan Stock
Exchange, generated sales of $4.6 billion and a $131 million profit" The
business media understandably glamorises him as shown by the following:
"In implementing U.S.-style management techniques, Douglas Hsu is
strengthening his empire and his claim to be a visionary among Taiwan's
second-generation tycoons"
continues the article at the Asia Inc.com website.[27]
In contrast the Taroko people are a small Tribe of 5000 with minimal influence
in Taiwan’s political economy. The outcome is hardly surprising.
Identity
Much like their origins Taiwan Aboriginal identity is a politically charged issue.
Prior to the 1990’s they were legally referred to as "
mountain compatriots", and they were forced to use Chinese names
and other forced assimilation policies. However successful pressuring, in the
1980s and 1990s, by Aboriginal groups lead to changes that allowed them use
their own Aboriginal names in legal and government administrative matters.
The First Nations are divided somewhat arbitrarily into 9 tribes which lump together various groups under one heading. The Sediq, Taroko, and Atayal Nations are officially classified as the Atayal tribe while the Thao Nation is thrown in with the Tsou Nation.
Chinese and foreign attitudes have traditionally been quite prejudice. The Chinese referred to the subjugated Aborigines as shu fan or "cooked" while the still independent ones were known as sheng fan or "raw" meaning uncivilised barbarians. Foreign missionaries such as the Canadian Presbyterian missionary George Mackay uses the term always uses "savages" to describe independent Aborigines in his 1896 book "From Far Formosa". Until 1984, the Wufong myth was taught as history in elementary schools. This myth holds that during the Ching Dynasty a Chinese official sacrificed his life and stopped the Aborigines from head-hunting. This has resulted in majority prejudice and in psychological harm to Aboriginal school children. [28]
Today their representations in the mass media are largely of highly stereotyped "singing and dancing natives in the mountains", a little wild even. These conform with and reinforce the majority stereotypes and are used extensively in advertising, and popular music. The Han Chinese are generally very ignorant of Aboriginal Rights. A common response to any general questions about Taiwan’s Aboriginal peoples is they can sing and dance very well, they like to drink, or they are lazy. This is prevalent even amongst the so-called educated segments of the population. In part this is a reflection of majority prejudices and also a function of the relative lack of political power of Taiwan’s First Nations.
Political Organisation:
According to Boris Voyer, a Canadian of mixed French and Cree ancestory, who was involved with Taiwan’s Aboriginal rights work during the early and mid 1990, internal disputes have plagued many Taiwanese aboriginal organisations further limiting their effectiveness. A good example according to Voyer is the Alliance of Taiwan Aborigines; factions sometimes were more concerned with their internal political positions than with the important external issues facing them. This infighting says Voyer led him to give up his participation in this movement. Though this is only one persons viewpoints it is largely consistent with views expressed elsewhere.
The fractured nature of Taiwan’s Aboriginal peoples is due
also to external factors include divisions between various, often competing,
Christian denominations, alliances to KMT or opposition political parties.
Intergenerational divisions between the elders are further strengthened by the
fact that younger generations are often unable to speak their native languages
while the elders often cannot speak Chinese. The impact of Taiwan’s modern
consumer society is powerful as FN youth are often are more familiar with
Pokemon and
As well traditional shamans and religious activities are fading due to the conversion of over 70 percent to Christianity of one sort or another. In addition intertribal differences further this process of fragmentation. Churches have taken over much of what were once indigenous functions providing education, health care, social organisation etc. [29]
Domestic Political Representation:
Under the ROC’s constitution the Aboriginal peoples have 6 seats reserved
National Legislature. This leads to a situation in which the larger tribes
dominate well the smaller ones are unrepresented, a situation that has lead the
Bunan Nation to issue a "Red Paper" for major reforms to the
government’s Aboriginal policies.
Currently of the 6 seats, 4 are 4 KMT, 1 DPP, and one an
independent. The KMT has been accused of widespread corrupt election practices
particularly votebuying where amounts of NT$10,000 (CDN$500) are used to rig
the outcomes.[30] It is also a common complaint that promises made to
Aboriginals are seldom conveniently forgotten after election time and their
policies are largely empty gestures without substance such as land rights.
Regarding the
Churches have become centers of political activity. In particular, the Presbyterian Church of Taiwan (PCT) has been a harsh critic of government policies and is a central figure in the Aboriginal Rights movement. This has some parallels with Latin American "Liberation Theology" in which Roman Catholic clergy have been important in the struggle for the rights of Aboriginal peoples and the poor. The PCT has been a staunch advocate of Taiwan’s independence something which didn’t endear it with the martial law period KMT regime. [32]
The Council of Aboriginal Affairs was started in 1996. It is a cabinet level organisation with several Aboriginals on it. However it is subject to to political and legal regulation that make it relatively toothless and more for political show than for Aboriginal Rights. According to several activists I have talked to it is common as a PR exercise for the government by opposition such as Peter Huang of the Taiwan Human Rights Association and Yvonne Lin of the Aboriginal Cultural Promotion Association also considers it a government tool.
One of the CAA’s major functions seems to be
"pragmatic diplomacy" related overseas exchanges such the visit of
the CAA leadership to a 1999 AFN Business conference in
"Now we have all those township mayors, representatives on both local and
central levels, and a Council of Aboriginal Affairs at the Cabinet level that are Aborigines. But what we have is
more compromises, more cover-ups…Aboriginal officials
can spend NT$30,000 dining with their indigenous guests from foreign countries,
but are reluctant to buy hoses for mountainside
Aborigines. Do you think the fate of the Aborigines has changed?"[33]
Conclusions:
Taiwan’s First Nations have began to remerge
politically over the last years. No longer independent and self sufficient,
they are now small marginalised factions in the political economy of the modern
Nation State known as
The Aboriginal Peoples of Taiwan face an uncertain future. Taiwan’s accession process to the WTO has opened Taiwan’s previously protected agricultural sector to foreign competition. This has caused considerable hardship for Taiwan’s Aboriginal peoples with many small Aboriginal farms going bankrupt. [34] Furthermore the importation of labour from the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and recently agreed to, Vietnam has brought 286,805 labourers into direct competition with the 195,000 Aboriginal people of working age.[35] The effect of this is to drive down working conditions and salaries for Taiwan’s Aboriginal people.
The March 2000 election of President Chen Shui-bien will not major shift in the policies of trade liberalisation that adversely impacted disproportionately Taiwan’s Aboriginal peoples. The President’s proposals were dismissed by Isak Afu, an Aboriginal Rights activist, as an entry in a fiction "composition contest" without substance or details. [36]
"While exploration, conquest, pacification, and at
times
segregation, containment, or relocation had formerly alternated with one
another, now subjugation, patronization, and intolerance have been clothed in
the forms of political co-optation, economic domination, forced or induced
cultural assimilation, social prejudice, and welfare tokenism under the
prevailing standards of integrationist orientation"[37]
Footnotes:
1) Pg. 36, Knapp, Ronald G. China’s
2)1996
3) China News newspaper,
4) Hsu,
5) Pg. 14. Hsu, Wen-Hsiang. Edited by Ronald G. Knapp. "China’s
6) Pg. 14, Hsu, Wen-hsiang, 1980. Citing Nakamura Takashi "
7) pg. 23. Knapp, Ronald G. Knapp. China’s
8) Japanese Census of 1904, pg. 199. Takekoshi, Yosaburo. Japanese Rule in
9) pg. 161. Rutter, Owen. Through
10) "The Schemes of Production: Taiwan’s development 1895 to 1945.
(Rainbow Sign Publishing Company, 1997)
11) This quote comes from an
12) Dated
13) pg. 5.Shepherd, John Robert. Statecraft and Political Economy on the
14) pg. 252. Davidson, James W. The
15) Ibid., pg. 442.
16) Pg. 53 & 55. Ka, Chih-Ming. Japanese
Colonialism in
17) Pg. 123, Rutter, 1923
18) Pg. 25, Hsu,
19) see report of Royal Commission on Aboriginal
Peoples (vol. 1 sec. 1 to 1.2) http://www.indigenous.bc.ca/rcap.htm
20) pg. 107, Hsu,
21) Ministry of the Interior, ROC government
webpage. URLLLl
22) "Report Of
http://www.halcyon.com/pub/FWDP/Eurasia/taiwan.txt
23) pg. 8, Martin Williams. "Pingchuanhui-The
Face of Taiwanese Racism".
24) This is a voucher booklet I collected during the summer of 1999. It
was included numerous discounts to various amusement parks and other tourist
attraction.
25) Greenpeace. "Taiwan Power Company Misrepresents
Radioactivity of Nuclear Waste to be sent to
26) List from Forbes magazine reprinted at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/june99/forbes20.htm
27) Cheng, Allan T.
"Far Eastern goes West " from Asia Inc. webpage ,dated August 1999,
http://www.asia-inc.com/august99/far.htm.]
28) pg. 68, Hsu,
29) The figure of 70% is commonly thrown about
in various publications. See pg. 22, Hsu,
30) Igung Shiban (Tien Chun-Chou). "Our Experience of the Incursion
of Cement Companies onto the Land of the Taroko People,
Working Group on Indigenous Populations dated
31)
32) SEE THEIR WEBPAGE
33) Yu Sen Lun "Quake politics reveals Aboriginal discontent".
34) Presybyterian Church of Taiwan’s Occasional Bulletin, March, April 1999
Volume XVI, No.2.
35) The statistics come from the following sources.
Lou, Stephanie. "Jobless Rate high among
Aborigines",
Yu Sen-lun. "Vietnamese labor coming to
36)
37) Cheng-Feng Shih of
Bibliography
Davidson, James W. The
Hsu,
Ka, Chih-Ming. Japanese Colonialism in
Knapp, Ronald G. Knapp. China’s
Reprinted by SMC Publishing 1995.
Mackay, L. George. "From Far
and Ferrier {Edinburgh and London}, 1896, Reprinted by SMC Publishing Inc. 1998
and 1991)
Rutter, Owen. Through
Shepherd, John Robert. Statecraft and Political Economy on the
Takekoshi, Yosaburo. Japanese Rule in
"The Schemes of Production: Taiwan’s
development 1895 to 1945." .Rainbow Sign Publishing Company, 1997.
Newspapers:
Afo, Isak. "Exploitative mythologies used to destroy Aborigines' sense of
self."
Hu, Lawrence. Exodus: the Aboriginal people's movement.
Williams, Martin. "Pingchuanhui-The
Face of Taiwanese Racism".
Yu Sen-lun. "Indigenous tribe handed back patch of traditional
lands".
Yu Sen Lun "Quake politics reveals Aboriginal
discontent".
Television:
http:\\abori.pts.org.tw
Human Resources:
Conversations and e-mail correspondence with:
-Martin Williams of the
-Peter Ng, President of the
- Yvonne Lin of the Aboriginal Cultural Promotion Association
- Boris Voyer, Aboriginal Rights Activist.
- Mark McDowell, Canadian Trade Office in
Internet Sources:
Cheng-Feng Shih of
"HWALIEN'S
http://www.freespeech.org/taiwanfns/tfn/Santsan.htm
"Report Of
http://www.halcyon.com/FWDP/fwdp.html
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples see: http://www.indigenous.bc.ca/rcap.htm
"Save
http://www.freespeech.org/taiwanfns/tfn/Yami1995.htm
"
http://www.freespeech.org/taiwanfns/tfn/Taipeires.htm
"Taiwan-400 Years of History and
Outlook". An abridgement
of texts written by Dr. Kiyoshi Ito, translated and edited by Walter Chen.
The last two chapters have been added by the editor. From
http://www.leksu.com/leksu-e.htm
Access Date:
"