4 Friday, October 16. 1970 University Daily Kansan KANSAN comment Taiwan: The Loss of a Friend By BRUCE ERICKSON Kansan Writer Canada took an extremely courageous and realistic step Tuesday by recognizing Peking and Mao Tse-tung's Communist Party on the mainland as the sole and legitimate government of China. But in doing so, it soley affronted Taiwan, or Nationalist China, and took an opposing stand to long-time U.S. policies toward the Chinese President Chiang Kai-shek. Perhaps now the nation that represented China persists on the earth will have at least a slight chance of being admitted to the United Nations; something it has been denied since 1952. The government that now is recognized as the true government of China by the United Nations and the United States is uncontestably a police state—same say a tyrannical one—and its people are seeking a freedom of their own choosing. The United States has long taken the position of comfortable ambiguity toward Taiwan and for 21 years Chiang has been imposing his peculiar form of repressive democracy on the Taiwans. In 1949, Chiang lost his contest for power on the Chinese mainland to the more successful Mao and escaped to the unwelcoming arms of Formosa. Its original inhabitants have been enduring his self-assessed rule ever since. Few will deny that this leaf-shaped island of 14,000 square miles that lies only 120 miles from the mainland has been economically prosperous compared to other Asian nations but the Formosan spirit of nationalism is stronger because for more than 350 years the Formosan people have been dominated by other than their own kind. They have been subjected to foreign "colonization" by the Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Chinese, Japanese and now Chiang and his following of mainlanders. It is worth noting that some political scientists suggest that Chiang's government is not the most popular among these. The displaced Chinese mainlanders comprise a minor percentage of Taiwan's population. Of the 13.5 million inhabitants, according to a 1968 newspaper census, only 2 million are post-1945 settlers from the mainland. From this faction comes the aging and elite guard that dominates the island's political structure. The present constitution and political structure was initiated when Chiang and his entourage took refuge; although it showed admirable forethought, it was designed a few years early. It's quite unusual, but nevertheless true, that no elections have taken place for the National Assembly since 1948. But never let it be said that Chiang is not the duly elected president of the Republic of China. He was last elected by the National Assembly to his fourth six-year term in 1966. But the National Assembly is dominated by his Nationalist People's Party, or the Kuomintang (KMT). Of the 2,961 members originally elected to the National Assembly in 1947, (the election was on the mainland) only 1,488 are still serving. The more unsympathetic observers of the government refer to it as a "gerontocracy." Taiwan is used as a "showcase of democracy" for the rest of Asia, particularly as an example to those 800 million other Chinese on the mainland, and its economic progress has been exemplary. It is indebted to the Japanese, who set a sound foundation for agricultural and industrial development during their occupation and to the United States for 4.5 billion in military and economic aid from 1949 to 1969. Since two-thirds of Taiwan is mountainous land that is unsuited for agriculture, a great deal of the farming is done along the Western coast and the upland foothills. As of 1965, 54 per cent of all workers were engaged in agriculture and only one-fourth of the population lived in urban centers. Like all developing economies, industry and urbanization are on the rise. Because of enlightened land reforms under a step called "land to the tiller" owner-cultivated land has increased from 56 per cent in 1948 to 86 per cent in 1959. Industrialization, too, appears to indicate a growing prosperity. Over 100 countries imported Taiwanese products in 1966. Taiwan exported a total of $500 million U.S. dollars in goods that year, and Japan bought one-fourth of that. Taiwan exported fresh bananas and pineapples, textiles, glass and even meats. Japan and Taiwan enjoy a close relationship—partly out of their identity, which they shared culture traits that the Japanese left behind as the dependent upon each other economically, and they have fear: their neighbor, Red China. Perhaps now, we have two clues to Chang's political longevity and the native Formosan's relative tolerance of him. Taiwan is fortunate because it is economically prosperous and is relatively secure from an outright invasion by the Red Army, primarily because of the powerful and imposing Chiang. The Formosan people would still like their island to have its own government. As soon as Chiang, now 80 years old, fulfilled his repeated contention of "liberating" the mainland, he says they can have it back. Now only the U.S. Seventh Fleet and U.S. forces in Japan prevent the Red Chinese from asserting their claim of "liberating" Taiwan. They face alternatives of absurdity and frustration. The idea of "one China and one Formosa" has been discussed in the United Nations. It is a hope, certainly, of the native Formosans, non-affected parties of the United Nations and probably everyone who wishes justice to them. It is possible that Canada's initiative this week was an early step in its achievement. But it does not appear to be of such an aspect. The many thousands of mainland Chinese living in Taiwan and other free nations will probably never saver their homeland again. This is why Canada's accord with Red China can be looked upon as courageous and realistic. Diplomatic relations and communication with Red China are necessary for a fruitful and peaceful future for Asia and the independent development of Taiwan. It is certain that Canada's action will not solve the problems of Taiwan, but at least it is a break in the long, continued impasse and ambiguity of major nations. One outstanding inevitability looms in the future and promises to have a profound effect on the status of China in the king's death. It can be assumed that nothing is going to change its glances of China toward its "inanable territory of Taiwan" as long as it does not take the aggressive initiative of regaining lost homeland by "striking one huge blow," as he reminded us last week, Taiwan's chances of a successful, independent future will improve. Nothing short of peaceful, mutual diplomatic agreement with Red China, backed by the force of the United Nations, will allow Taiwan, or "island beautiful" as the Portuguese called it, the future that it wants. LETTERS Is Agnew Right—Is Kent Forgotten? To the Editor: Last May thousands of KU students, indignant over the Cambodian Invasion and the Violent deaths at Kent State, have called as a form of protesting our national priorities. According to a survey printed in the May 14 Kansan, 8.39 per cent of the student body chose not to attend school. Our question is, "How sincere were they in their actions?" Spiro T. Agnew stated his opinion on student protest when he said that students were "just on a spring lark." Students responded positively given the opportunity to disprove Agnew. But if Agnew is wrong, then where are the tens of thousands of students who last May were so outraged and so outraged national priorities that they swarmed to Washington? When the high emotional level of the mass movement started to wane, the concern over the issues seemed to go with it. Groups endeavoring to continue in a legitimate manner the process of change (such as the National Coalition for a Responsible Congress, Congressional Action Fund, and Movement for a New Congress, to name a few) have met with appalling lack of in-flow of our nations priorities changed because Or does this reaction indicate that student motivation must come from a strong emotional appeal? Must we continue to nave more Kent States and Jackson States and Cambodians for Americans to act? For those who are truly concerned: Help to fund the campaigns of national candidates who are in close races, who are aiming at a redirection of national priorities, and whose opponents differ significantly on the issues. Molly Lafin St. Louis, Mo., senior St. Louis, Mo., senior Garden City senior Brenda Grimes Lyons Junior Alan McCormack Pheonomus sophromore Grades Are 'Discriminatory' As concerned students here at the University of Kansas, we have had numerous opportunities to experience situations which strengthen our beliefs that all universities discriminate against those who are undermined as bright as others. We have come to understand that academic standards are too high. We feel that rule which states that a student who does not maintain an average of a "C" or better over the span of two successive semesters shall be dismissed from the university is very unjust and should be criticized. Many average high school graduates pass college entrance tests with many people who have "funked out" of college result, they feel that they are not capable of producing grades that are acceptable to the University. They therefore assume that going to college for a year and "hinking out" will be a waste of time. To the Editor: As we close, we urge University officials to consider these possibilities. So universities across the nation, stop your discriminatory tactics and give everyone a chance! (2) The university would be giving everyone, from all academic levels, a chance to obtain a course. (1) There would be a general increase in enrolment. Edward Rainev Lawrence Hanley Kansas City sophomore Griff & the Unicorn Mullins, S.C., sophomore "Copyright 1970. University Daily Kansan" . . and please help us crush the bombers, anarchists, yippies, freaks. and other malcontents . . . . but not before the election, of course. LETTERS Problems of Student Control To the Editor: An article in the October 8 Kansan begins by stating, "Government at KU was purposefully structured to insure that any effective power would remain with the faculty and administration, according to Lawrence Velvet . . ." Others have also made this astute observation, and few will disagree if they bother to read the Senate Code. From this article, we learn that Velvet now advocates a most drastic change, whereby there would be equal representation by students on all councils, committees and factions of the University government. While this is not a terrible cry among certain elements at KU, we hope that such a condition will not materialize, and for good reasons: Professor Velvet can find ample evidence, south of the border, that equal participation by students in university government commonly has produced chaos, not democracy. For this reason, "co-government," as it is referred to here, has been rejected by some of Latin America's leading universities and students among its most ardent advocates. An article on point in the most recent issue of Intercultural Education magazine is quite illustrating. We urge Velvet to read this, or any a number of other books or articles on the topic, and understand what he favors has proven such a calamity, one of which that he is wholly uninformed or whether he simply dismisses the experience of other institutions as "irrelevant." But as Lamartean has observed, "history teaches us neither even the future." When we ignore her lessons, we往往缺乏 experience. In a degree of experience is useful before one takes on a course or task, whether it be pliating an airplane, operating on a car, or directing the affairs of an institution of higher learning. So it's no surprise that faculty given a greater role in the setting of University policies—a subject on which we have heard little of late from our educational reformers—we doubt that turning the University over to student representatives is what is needed. If it is true, as reported, that all the student representatives at the Council meeting which tabled Velvet's question representation voted against the motion to table, then we doubt how accurately they represent those students who found Velvet's suggestion amusing or incredible. While some may think the University fortune in having such a champion of student interest is much worse, it also provides a level of assurance polarization which do more harm than good. Such a proposal does not serve the best interests of the Universi- Robert W. Greaves, Professor of History Carl H. Lande, Associate professor of political science Gregory C. Knight, Assistant professor of geography George F. Jenks, Professor of geography Harry M. Lindquist, Assistant professor of anthropology Robert W. McColl, Associate professor of geography Felix Moos, Professor of anthropology Jaroslaw Pikalkiewicz, Associate professor of political science John P. Davidson. Professor of physics Associate professor of political science THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN An All-American college newspaper Kansan Telephone Numbers Newsroom--UN 4-4810 Business Office--UN 4-4358 Published at the University of Kansai expels holidays and examination permitted in a year. Second class bachelor's degree in English or foreign language, employment advertised to all except excellent or national origin. Outside exclusion of Rumanian or the State of Kansai. NEWS STAFF News Advisor Del Brinkman Editor Dodd Mccormick Campus Editor Tom Slaughter News Editor Glanbond Blain Mary Jo Thum: Nila Walker Sports Editor Charlie Cappe. Editorial Writers Women's Editor Carolyn Bowers Editor Marilyn McMullen Editor Camille Campus Assistant Sports Editor Don Bailen Makeup Editors Todd Hifl Secretary Phil Phillips Photographer Greg Sorber, Mike Radezhchen. BUSINESS STAFF Business Advisor Mel Adams Business Manager Mike Banks Business Manager John Lantos Assistant Bus. Marr Jill Smith Assistant Marr Mr. Ron Carter Assistant Marr Mr. Rory Classified Adv. Marr Shirley Blank Circulation Manager Todd Smith Accounting Manager Steve Brown Member Associated Collegiate Press Ritual