A: Let's first clarify the definition of Aboriginal self-government. Some scholars, arguing that Taiwan is a society of immigrants, say that the residents can be categorized according to when they first came to Taiwan, with the so-called "indigenous people" having been the first to have arrived. This is a theory to which we are strongly opposed. According to the UN's definition, "indigenous people" means those people who lived in a certain place prior to the development and formation of what is now the mainstream society and culture of that place. Taiwan's Aboriginal people already lived here for hundreds or thousands of years before Han Chinese and other cultures came to dominate this land, and moreover we effectively controlled this island. Later, Han Chinese people and the Japanese colonialists used overwhelming political, military, and economic power to conquer the island, never asking us what we wanted. Because the current form of rule is disadvantageous for the survival and development of indigenous peoples in Taiwan, Aboriginal self-government is a demand for the restoration of pre-existing rights. This is also one of the main themes of the draft UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples."
In what ways does the current regime deprive indigenous peoples of rights? The main ones include nationalization of land and resources, and use of administrative jurisdictions instead of a mechanism for self-government at the tribal level. In terms of self-government for tribal communities, a spirit of harmony or compromise is a core element in the Aboriginal tradition. Among the Atayal indigenous people, for example, all important matters were decided by consensus among clan heads and elders. Choices made in this way may not be the best possible ones, but at least everyone is agreed on them. But now tribal communities have been supplanted by neighborhood and township jurisdictions, with township heads produced through elections, making it very hard to achieve general compromise and consensus. The village assemblies, meanwhile, are empty shells, and people who really care about local affairs don't even bother to join them.
We will first try to revive the traditional decision-making model with "tribal meetings." We are already encouraging the various groups within tribal communities--such as churches, social development associations, women's groups, elected representatives, schools, and police stations--to put forward representatives as the core participants in organizing tribal meetings, where they can collectively discuss tribal affairs. All applications for projects that come from tribal communities will only be eligible for funding from the CIP if they first get approval at a tribal meeting.
Once the tribal meeting system is up and running smoothly, the second step will be to promote "tribal assemblies." Tribal assemblies will be formal organizations, legal bodies just like county or municipal assemblies. As they will require statutory authorization, they are being incorporated into the new version of the "Aboriginal Self-Government Act" currently being drafted by the CIP. The relevant provisions will grant clear authority to tribal communities to establish assemblies, which will then discuss those areas to be under tribal self-government and will study regulations governing tribal autonomy.
To go to the next level, after the 200-300 tribal communities of, say, the Amis people--to take a hypothetical case--have their assemblies, they can form an alliance of assemblies, which can in turn discuss the items for which the Amis should enjoy self-government, and which can also formally establish an Assembly of the Amis Nation, draft the relevant regulations for establishment of the autonomous government, and begin preparatory work for the actual formation of that government. Only in this way would the Amis achieve genuine self-rule.
Looking beyond that, the assemblies of the 12 Aboriginal nations could then organize an "Assembly of the Indigenous Peoples of Taiwan," which would coordinate or negotiate with the central government. When President Chen Shui-bian talks about "a country within a country" or "quasi state-to-state relations," he is referring to this coordination mechanism. At that time, the negotiating representatives would have to have a wide understanding of the needs of all ethnic groups, and be composed of organizations which are delegated by the various ethnic groups. The "Assembly of the Indigenous Peoples of Taiwan" would, both for reasons of tradition and common sense, be a natural representative.
Q: The various Aboriginal peoples have different needs and interests. Would each indigenous nation deal separately with the central government, or would the joint assembly speak on behalf of all?
A: Although there are differences between the indigenous peoples, there are very close relations among us. Demands for autonomy are pretty much centered around land and resource rights, and there is considerable unanimity. There is, however, a difference between coastal regions and mountain regions. The issue that currently most concerns us mountain-dwelling people is the government's ban on planting crops above 1500 meters. Though this suits the national interest, it hurts the interests of tribal communities, and is even making it impossible for us to survive. If we had autonomy we could negotiate this with the Executive Yuan. For instance, we could come up with a program of high-altitude farming that is not damaging. Or Aboriginal peoples could completely take over reforestation work, replacing the current forest-maintenance incentive programs. There will be a lot of possibilities to discuss when the time comes.
Q: Outsiders have a lot of questions about how the autonomous areas will be delineated. What if there are both Han Chinese and indigenous peoples living in an autonomous area? How will land belonging to the Forestry Bureau, Taiwan Sugar Corporation, or other bodies be handled? A lot of land reserved for indigenous people has long been used by Han Chinese and business interests, so how will that be handled?
A: This is the reason we advocate using the tribal community as the unit of self-government. The traditional lands of each tribe are still pretty much intact. For example, although half of all residents in Nantou County's Hsinyi Township are Han Chinese, in tribal communities like Tsuchiang Village or Aikuo Village, the great majority of the residents are indigenous people.
In defining the self-governing areas, the foundation will be the 30 currently existing "mountain Aboriginal townships" and the 25 "plains Aboriginal townships." These will be subdivided according to the traditional territories of the various tribal communities. After that, we will make a declaration that if the Forestry Bureau, Taiwan Sugar, national parks, or whoever, thinks that a particular piece of land belongs to them, each party can state its position and produce its evidence, and then we can leave it up to a commission specially charged with investigating and resolving land claims. This commission should have judicial status.
As for non-Aboriginal peoples living in an autonomous area, we think they should receive equal treatment. If they are renting and using their land legally, that part of the land which has no economic value can naturally be easily repurchased, while they of course can continue to use the part of the land that has value, such as that used for growing apples or other cash crops. We hope that eventually we can reacquire that land for its cash value. We can also follow the approach used for Maori lands in New Zealand. Land that cannot be reclaimed from outsiders right away can only be leased for a maximum of 50 years. When absolutely necessary, leases can be terminated by law. As for land being used in violation of restrictions, you have to see whether cultivation began before the promulgation of the Soil and Water Conservation Act or after. There should be different approaches and a variety of policy options to resolve the most thorny land problems.
Q: What subject matter would tribes have self-government over? Would it be complete autonomy, including education, healthcare, finances, transportation, and so on? How can financial independence be achieved? What kinds of conflicts could there be with county governments over financial resources?
A: The Aboriginal Basic Law clearly states: "As for the powers and finances of autonomous areas, the Law on Local Government Systems, the Law Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditure, and the provisions related to counties in other laws and regulations, shall provisionally apply, unless other laws or regulations stipulate otherwise." That is to say, an autonomous area would have the same status as a county government.
The specific items for self-government would be determined by each tribal community. These would mainly include use and management of mountains, rivers, hot springs, and other natural resources; linguistic and cultural autonomy; and judicial affairs. Other matters could only be managed with the assistance of the local and central governments. As for particular items, it is hard to say anything specific at this time. In addition, the relationship between autonomous areas and city or county governments, or the municipal or central governments, will have to be gradually clarified.
In terms of financial resources, the central government would designate a fixed percentage of the GDP to go into a "tribal fund" each year. There will also be a "General Fund for Indigenous People," with money to come from managing hot springs, water companies, protection of artistic creations, and so on, which could be drawn on to cover the expenses of autonomous areas. Tribal communities would also have independent tax revenues and income from management of natural resources. Independent tax revenues would come from a clearly defined area, so there wouldn't be much conflict with city or county governments. The places where conflicts are likely to arise include mining, gravel, that kind of thing, so laws will be needed to set the rules of the game.
Q: The road to self-government looks rather long. How can Taiwanese society be persuaded to accept Aboriginal self-government?
A: The short-run goal is to see tribal assemblies quickly established, with assemblies representing entire indigenous nations being the medium term goal, and the Assembly of the Indigenous Peoples of Taiwan coming as the ultimate step. This will create the framework for interaction between an autonomous government and the national government. At that time there will naturally no longer be any need for the Council of Indigenous Peoples to exist. I think it will take at least ten years to create this kind of structure.
Nonetheless, whether in terms of domestic politics, international trends, or the current situation of indigenous peoples in Taiwan, self-government is clearly the way to go. For a thousand years, the Aboriginal peoples controlled the central highlands and surrounding areas, without any destruction, whereas over the last century the economic system and state intrusion have had a negative impact. If Aboriginal autonomy takes shape, using our own methods to better manage this heartland area of Taiwan can be a major contribution to the country. Aboriginal self-government means combining the culture and resources of indigenous peoples with the logic and thinking of Han Chinese to jointly manage Taiwan. This will have a positive impact for Taiwan as a whole.
@List.jpg?w=522&h=410&mode=crop&format=webp&quality=80)
@List.jpg?w=522&h=410&mode=crop&format=webp&quality=80)
@List.jpg?w=522&h=410&mode=crop&format=webp&quality=80)