两岸 > 评论解读

光复台湾的是全中国人民共同参与并取得胜利的世界反法西斯战争

来源: 中国日报网
2020-10-23 18:35 
分享
分享到
分享到微信

最近,中国国民党在高调举办一系列纪念“台湾光复”的活动,党主席江启臣将光复台湾的光辉完全归功于国民党和“中华民国”,讲话一方面指责民进党数典忘祖,另一方面回批评中国大陆喧宾夺主。纪念台湾光复是海内外中国人的共同记忆,民进党消极对待需要被批判,但中国大陆的纪念为什么被国民党视为争夺话语权的行为,就十分耐人寻味。

江启臣认为光复台湾的是“中华民国”,而非中华人民共和国,因此中国大陆无权宣称光复台湾的光辉功绩,中国大陆的纪念活动是喧宾夺主。但江启臣的观点,实际上在事实和逻辑上犯了三个根本错误:

台湾光复作为一个结果,是台湾被迫割让给日本之后,海峡两岸的中国人民一直坚持反抗直到取得胜利的结果。台湾人民从未甘心接受做日本的殖民统治,反抗从头到尾,在此期间更是从未缺少过两岸人民的共同参与。中国大陆的人民和各种爱国政治力量从未放弃过对于包括日本在内的帝国主义列强的反抗,直到抗日战争中联合在一起共同参与世界性反法西斯战争,这其中包括当时作为执政党的中国国民党,但更包括中国共产党、各民主党派、无党派人士以及众多爱国力量。是团结起来的中国军民,是联合起来的反法西斯力量,一起战胜了包括日本在内的法西斯势力。最终,中国为战胜国,中国人民作为战胜国的人民,以战胜国的资格恢复了对于台湾的主权。台湾人民也实现了回归祖国的梦想,台湾人民与大陆人民一道成为全中国主权的拥有者。是两岸中国人的共同努力,使台湾回到祖国,台湾光复因而是全中国人民的光辉记忆,绝不独属于国民党和作为政治符号的“中华民国”。

如果按照江启臣以名代实的错误逻辑方式,被迫将台湾割让给日本的是清政府,而非“中华民国”,那么江启臣嘴中的“中华民国”如何有权光复台湾呢?这不就是“台独”的逻辑吗?再次强调,台湾之所以能够被光复,是因为中国(包括清政府、中华民国(1949以前)以及中华人民共和国等一系列主权代表者)恢复了曾经被日本殖民者夺走的对于台湾的主权权力。光复台湾的主权者是中国,中国是中国人民所构成的统一的政治共同体,中国的存在先于一切代表中国的符号。中华民国是当时中国的国号,中华人民共和国是新中国的国号,有权利和责任纪念台湾光复的是包括海峡两岸在内的全体中国人民,中国大陆当然有权利、有义务举办纪念台湾光复的活动。中国是国际法主体,中华民国是代表当时中国的合法政权,但不能将中华民国与中国进行名实分离,主次颠倒。中国作为主体和代表中国的名义应当辩证地看待;

中国国民党纪念台湾光复本身是值得肯定的正面行为,但对于这段历史应当诚实全面地对待,不能只是选择性地宣传自身的功绩。中国国民党抗战有功,对于中国人民反法西斯事业做出了重大贡献,这一点在中国大陆本就得到普遍承认。在台湾岛内则因为受到“台独史观”的影响,中国国民党的抗战功业反倒未被充分认可。但问题在于,国民党是否应该躬身自省:为什么台湾岛内对于纪念台湾光复就有很大的阻力呢?台湾民众之所以没有正确的历史认知,难道不是曾经的国民党一味以“反共”为名实施长期戒严和政治高压所带来的负面后果吗?难道不是民进党推行“”去中国化”、美化日本殖民统治所带来的严重后果吗?只是选择性地认为国民党有功于台湾建设和民主化,这是对于历史的片面之词。这样的纪念活动又怎么会得到普遍的认可呢?一面怪中国大陆争夺话语权,一面指责民进党漠视历史,但如今的国民党又如何呢?

纪念历史,更需要正视历史。打铁还需自身硬,中国国民党曾经的功绩已经写进历史。如今的国民党是否还能再立新功,就更需要把自己放到全民族的视野中,坚持维护“两岸同属一个中国”的初心,捍卫来之不易的“九二共识”与两岸关系和平发展,为两岸人民再谋福祉,为中华民族伟大复兴做出自己的贡献。

(本文系京台文化交流研究中心研究员王丰收)

It was the world anti fascist war in which all Chinese people participated and won the victory that makes recovering Taiwan happen

Wang Fengshou

Recently, the KMT has been holding a series of activities to commemorate the "recovery of Taiwan". The chairman of the party, Johnny Chi-Chen Chiang, has attributed the glory of Taiwan recovery to the Kuomintang and“the Republic of China” . On the one hand, he criticized the DPP for forgetting history and on the other hand, it struck back the Chinese mainland for its gate-crasher supplanting the host. Commemorating Taiwan's recovery is a common memory of Chinese at home and abroad. The DPP's negative treatment needs to be criticized. But why the Chinese mainland's remembrance is regarded as fighting for the right to speak by the Kuomintang is very intriguing.

Johnny Chi-Chen Chiang believed that the recovery of Taiwan was the "Republic of China" rather than the People's Republic of China, so the Chinese mainland had no right to claim the glorious achievements of Taiwan recovery , and the commemoration of the Chinese mainland was a minor issue taking precedence over a major one. But in fact, Johnny Chi-Chen Chiang made three fundamental mistakes in fact and logic.

First, the recovery of Taiwan as a result was the result of the Chinese people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait persistently resisting until victory after Taiwan was forced to cede to Japan. The people of Taiwan have never willingly accepted to be a Japanese colony, and the resistance has never been short of the common participation of the people on both sides of the Taiwan Straits. The Chinese mainland and all kinds of patriotic political forces never gave up their resistance against imperialist powers including Japan until they joined together in the war of resistance against Japan, including Chinese Kuomintang, then-China's ruling party, but also the Chinese Communist Party, democratic parties, non party personages and many patriotic forces. It is a United Chinese army and people, a united anti-fascist force, which together defeated the fascist forces including Japan. Finally, China was the victor, and the Chinese people, as the people of the victorious country, regained sovereignty over Taiwan in the capacity of the victorious country. The Taiwan people have also realized their dream of returning to the motherland. Together with the people of the mainland, the Taiwan people have become the owners of China's sovereignty. It is the joint efforts of the Chinese people on both sides of the Straits to bring Taiwan back to the motherland. This glorious memory belongs to the whole Chinese people. It does not belong solely to the Kuomintang and the "Republic of China" which is just a political symbol.

Secondly, if the Qing government was forced to cede Taiwan to Japan, rather than the "Republic of China", according to Johnny Chi-Chen Chiang's wrong logic of "name instead of reality", how could the "Republic of China" in Johnny Chi-Chen Chiang's mouth have the right to recover Taiwan? Isn't this the logic of the so-called "Taiwan independence"? Once again, the reason why Taiwan was recovered was that China (including a series of sovereignty representatives such as the Qing government, the Republic of China (before 1949) and the people's Republic of China) restored the sovereignty over Taiwan that had been taken away by the Japanese colonists. It is China owns the Sovereign of Taiwan. China is a unified political community composed of the Chinese people. China's existence precedes all symbols representing China. The Republic of China was the national name of China at that time. The People's Republic of China is the national name of new China. It has the right and responsibility to commemorate this glorious memory for all the Chinese people, including the two sides of the Taiwan Straits. So naturally, the Chinese mainland has the right and obligation to organize activities to commemorate Taiwan's recovery. China is the subject of international law, and the Republic of China is the legal regime representing China at that time. However, the name of China and China itself should not be separated and the primary and secondary should not be reversed. China as the subject and the name of China should be treated dialectically;

Third, the KMT's commemoration of Taiwan's recovery itself is a positive act worthy of affirmation. However, we should treat this period of history honestly and comprehensively, not just selectively publicize its own achievements. The Kuomintang has made great contributions to the anti-fascist cause which has been generally recognized in the Chinese mainland. On the other hand, due to the influence of the historical view of Taiwan independence, the Chinese Kuomintang's contribution to the war of resistance against Japan was not fully recognized. But the question is whether the KMT should bow down to self-reflexion: why is there so much resistance in Taiwan to commemorate Taiwan's recovery? Is this not the responsibility of the Kuomintang, which once monopolized Taiwan's political power? Is it not the negative consequences of the long-term martial law and political pressure imposed by the KMT in the name of "anti Communist" that makes the Taiwan people do not have a correct historical understanding? Is it not the serious consequences brought about by the DPP's "de-sinicization" and glorifying Japanese colonial rule?It is a one-sided term for history to think selectively that the Kuomintang has contributed to the construction and democratization of Taiwan. How can such commemorative activities be universally recognized? In the eyes of Johnny Chi-Chen Chiang,the Chinese mainland is fighting for the right to speak, and the DPP is ignoring history. But what about the KMT today?

To commemorate history, we need to face history squarely. The achievements of the Chinese Kuomintang have been written into history. Whether the Kuomintang can make new achievements or not, it needs to put itself in the perspective of the whole Chinese nation, adhere to the original intention of "both sides belong to one China", defend the hard-earned "1992 consensus" and the peaceful development of cross-strait relations, seek the well-being of the people on both sides of the Strait, and make its own contribution to the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

中国日报网版权说明:凡注明来源为“中国日报网:XXX(署名)”,除与中国日报网签署内容授权协议的网站外,其他任何网站或单位未经允许禁止转载、使用,违者必究。如需使用,请与010-84883777联系;凡本网注明“来源:XXX(非中国日报网)”的作品,均转载自其它媒体,目的在于传播更多信息,其他媒体如需转载,请与稿件来源方联系,如产生任何问题与本网无关。
版权保护:本网登载的内容(包括文字、图片、多媒体资讯等)版权属中国日报网(中报国际文化传媒(北京)有限公司)独家所有使用。 未经中国日报网事先协议授权,禁止转载使用。给中国日报网提意见:rx@chinadaily.com.cn
中文 | English