China and Taiwan – A Short History

The relationship between mainland China and the island known today as Taiwan has evolved over many centuries and is shaped by migration, imperial rule, colonialism, civil war, competing national identities, and modern geopolitics. The history is complex because both the mainland government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the government of Taiwan, the Republic of China (ROC), developed different interpretations of sovereignty and legitimacy.

Early Taiwan Before Large-Scale Chinese Settlement. For thousands of years, Taiwan was inhabited by Austronesian Indigenous peoples, culturally and linguistically related to peoples in the Philippines and Pacific islands. Imperial Chinese dynasties knew of the island, but for much of history it remained outside direct Chinese administration. Beginning in the late Ming period (16th–17th centuries), increasing numbers of settlers from Fujian and Guangdong provinces migrated to Taiwan, especially fishermen and farmers.

European Colonial Presence (1600s). In the early 17th century, European powers entered Taiwan. The Netherlands established a colony in southern Taiwan in 1624. Then Spain briefly occupied northern Taiwan from 1626–1642. There is much that can be said about this period but there is perhaps one lasting effect: the Dutch encouraged Han Chinese immigration to develop agriculture and trade. The indigenous people identity was, for all practical purposes, at risk of being absorbed into a Chinese identity.

Taiwan apart from China. In the 17th century the Ming Dynasty of China fell to the Qing Dynasty. In 1662, a Ming loyalist on Taiwan, Zheng Chenggong (Koxinga), expelled the Dutch and established a regime on Taiwan. It was an outpost of the now fallen Ming Dynasty. Koxinga hoped Taiwan could serve as a base to retake mainland China from the Qing. Even from this early date there was a strong sense of “other” from the mainland Chinese. This and the following years are a fluid time in the history of China, Japan and Korea.

Qing Dynasty Comes to Taiwan. In 1683, the Qing conquered Taiwan and incorporated it into the empire. Initially the Qing treated Taiwan as a frontier territory and limited migration, but over time millions of Han Chinese settlers arrived. During this period indigenous peoples were gradually displaced from western plains into mountainous regions, ethnic tensions sometimes emerged between settlers from different regions of China, and Taiwan became increasingly linked economically and culturally with the mainland Fujian province. In 1885 Taiwan became a full province of the Qing Empire and firmly part of mainland China. The Chinese Qing government was China’s last imperial dynasty. 

But by this time the Qing Empire had fallen on hard times at the hands of the European colonial powers, especially Britain. The great lure of China had not only been for its exotic exports but the possibilities of exports to China with their population in the millions. In the mid-19th century Britain had a massive trade deficit with China, as they imported huge amounts of tea, silk, and porcelain but China wanted few British products in return. An import/product was needed that would balance the trade relationship. Unfortunately the British East India company began the importation of opium from India. It became the commodity that reversed the cash flow, paying for Chinese goods but causing widespread addiction in China.

Seeing the social and economic devastation, the Qings banned opium in 1839. They confiscated and destroyed over 20,000 chests of British opium in Guangzhou (Canton), the merchants demanded compensation, viewing it as an attack on property. Their demand was backed by the British government who further demanded “free trade” and an end to China’s restrictive Canton system which limited each foreign nation’s traders to one port and imposed strict rules for transactions. The conflict was fundamentally about sovereignty – China asserting its right to control its own internal affairs versus Britain’s assertion of international trade rights and extraterritoriality for its citizens. The First Opium War between Great Britain and China was fought from 1839 to 1842. The British crushed the Chinese and forced trade agreements that highly favored the British. Other colonial powers demanded equal benefits leading to what are called, “The Unequal Treaties.” A second Opium War was fought in 1857-1858.  

The once great China was now a devastated nation subjected to colonial demands.  Something that was not lost on Japan as it came out of its isolationist period and entered the Meiji Era of Japanese governance. You read about this movement within Japan that would ultimately greatly impact China.

Japanese Rule (1895–1945). The First Sino-Japanese War resulted from the collision of modern Japan’s strategy to be recognized as a great world power, China’s central government declining ability to extract tributes from regions and tribute countries, and increased instability in Korea as Japan and Russia strove to exert influence over this traditional Chinese tribute state. I leave the details of this period and the conflict to others. Japan won and extracted major concessions from China (Treaty of Shimonoseki) one of which was that China transferred full sovereignty of Taiwan (then called Formosa), the Pescadores (Penghu Islands) and the Liaodong Peninsula including Port Arthur, a warm water port. There were many other concessions. For the next 50 years Taiwan was a Japanese colony. Japan built railways, ports, and modern infrastructure; expanded education and public health; suppressed resistance movements; and encouraged Japanese cultural assimilation. The Taiwanese experienced both modernization and colonial subjugation during this 50-year era.

Return to Chinese Rule After World War II.  After World War II, Japan surrendered Taiwan to the Republic of China (ROC) government led by Chiang Kai-shek and the Kuomintang (KMT). However, tensions quickly emerged between local Taiwanese and mainland Chinese administrators. Corruption and economic disruption fueled unrest. In 1947 the February 28 Incident (often called the “2-28 Incident”) erupted after anti-government protests. The KMT violently suppressed the uprising, killing thousands. This became a foundational trauma in modern Taiwanese political memory.

Chinese Civil War and the Division of China (1949). The modern cross-strait conflict largely dates from the end of the mainland Chinese Civil War. In 1949 Mao Zedong and the Chinese Communist Party established the People’s Republic of China (PRC; Communist China) on the mainland. Chiang Kai-shek and the ROC government retreated to Taiwan with roughly 1–2 million soldiers, officials, and refugees. From that point onward the PRC governed mainland China and the ROC governed Taiwan and several nearby islands. Both governments initially claimed to be the sole legitimate government of all China.

The Cold War and Modern Era. During the Cold War the United States supported Taiwan militarily and politically, while the PRC viewed Taiwan as a breakaway province that must eventually be reunified. Major crises occurred in the Taiwan Strait in the 1950s and again in 1995–1996 when missile tests and military exercises heightened tensions.

Taiwan under KMT rule was authoritarian for decades under martial law (1949–1987), a period known as the “White Terror.” Beginning in the late 1980s, Taiwan democratized: martial law ended, opposition parties were legalized, and free elections developed leading to modern Taiwan with its vibrant democratic and economic system.

Changing Identity

A significant development has been the growth of a distinct Taiwanese identity. Many residents now identify primarily as “Taiwanese” rather than “Chinese,” especially younger generations. At the same time, political opinion in Taiwan varies.  Some support eventual reunification with China, some favor maintaining the current ambiguous status, and others support formal independence. Most polling shows strong support for maintaining the current de facto independence without provoking war.

The Current Situation

Today the PRC claims Taiwan as part of China under the “One China” principle while Taiwan operates as a self-governing democracy with its own military, currency, constitution, and elections. Most countries, including the United States, do not formally recognize Taiwan as an independent state, but many maintain unofficial relations with it. The Vatican does recognize Taiwan (ROC) as an independent nation. The PRC has stated it seeks peaceful reunification but has not ruled out force. Taiwan rejects PRC rule under the Communist Party. This issue remains one of the most sensitive geopolitical flashpoints in the world.

Taiwan and the United States

Here in 2026 the relationship between the United States and Taiwan is intentionally close but formally unofficial. Since Washington shifted diplomatic recognition of China from Taiwan/ROC to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the U.S. has recognized Beijing as the sole legal government of China under its “One China” policy, while simultaneously maintaining extensive political, economic, and military ties with Taiwan.

Politically, the United States supports Taiwan’s democratic system, its participation in international trade and selected international organizations, and the peaceful resolution of disputes. Washington does not officially recognize Taiwan as an independent state, but it strongly opposes any attempt to change Taiwan’s status by force or coercion. Militarily, the United States is Taiwan’s principal security partner and largest arms supplier. The U.S. is committed to helping Taiwan maintain a sufficient self-defense capability by providing defensive weapons, training, and military support. 

All-in-all, U.S. policy is “strategic ambiguity,” meaning Washington deliberately avoids stating explicitly whether American forces would directly defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese attack. While supplying Taiwan with arms the U.S. also avoids provoking open conflict with China.

Being Born

This coming Sunday is Holy Trinity Sunday. While in the earlier post we dedicated some time to “anōthen,” what about the significance of being “born,” whether it be again or from above. Every reference to gennao (“give birth”) in John 3 are passive (vv. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).  A good grammatical question to ask here is “who is the one who gives birth?”  Mary gave birth to Jesus – clearly here, Mary is the “actor.”  But in v.3 there is no clearly stated actor because the verbs are passively stated. The word gennao is used in John 1:12-13 where the “actor” is clearly defined: “But to those who did accept him he gave power to become children of God, to those who believe in his name, who were born not by natural generation nor by human choice nor by a man’s decision but of God.” The “actor” is God.

This quick grammar lesson indicates that being “born from above” is not something we do. It is something done to us (by God). In a similar way, being born the first time was not something we did. Our physical births were caused by powers far beyond our being. Being born is something that happens to us from powers outside of ourselves. We have to take that image seriously. The problem of some who claim to be “born again” is that it often becomes something they do. The etymology, grammar and the imagery of birth indicate that gennēthē anōthen is something God (the one “from above”) does to or for us.

Bruce Malina and Richard Rohrbaugh write about the importance of birth as status in Social-Science Commentary on the Gospel of John [p.82]:

“It is critical to recognize that the topic here is birth. Birth status was the single, all-important factor in determining a person’s honor rating. Ascribed honor, the honor derived from one’s status at birth, was simply a given. It usually stayed with a person for life. … To be born over again, born for a second time (one meaning of anōthen ), however unthinkable that event might be, would alter one’s ascribed honor status in a very fundamental way. A new ascribed honor status would derive from a new birth.

Thus, a second birth, especially if it differed substantially in honor level from the first birth, would be a life-changing event of staggering proportions.

Then they comment specifically about the transformation indicated in our text:

“To be born ‘from above’ — that is, to be born of the sky, of the realm of God — is to belong to that realm, to become a veritable child of God. This, of course, is to acquire an honor status of the very highest sort. … Thus, whatever honor status a person might have in Israelite society, being born “from above” would recreate that person at a whole new level. In addition, since all children of the same father share that father’s honor status, differences in status among “the children of God” obviously disappear, except for the firstborn.”

All that being said, in our day, “Have you been born from above?” or “Have you been born again?” are asking the right question.

How is all this relevant to the celebration of the Solemnity of the Trinity? As tomorrow’s post will make clear when the dialogue continues, the expression “born of water and Spirit” (v. 5) interprets the phrase “to be born anōthen.” One can begin to see how the larger gospel passage, just beyond the boundaries of the actual text that will be proclaimed, speaks directly to the Trinitarian life of a believer.


Image credit: Rublev, Trinity icon, 15the century, Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, Moscow, Public Domain

Born anōthen

This coming Sunday is Holy Trinity Sunday. Jesus’ response to Nicodemus’ opening greeting is bold, challenging and begins with the solemn “Amen, Amen…” 

3 Jesus answered and said to him, “Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born gennēthē anōthen .” 

The expression gennēthē anōthen can be translated as “born again” or “born from above.”  Some bibles opt for the “again” (TLW), some opt for “again” with a footnote to explain there is an alternative (RSV, NIV, TEV, NASB, ESV, KJV).  Others opt for “from above” without explanation (NAB, NJB) or with explanation as to the alternative (NSRV, CEV).

This double meaning is possible only in Greek; there is no Hebrew or Aramaic word with a similar double meaning. Jesus’ words to Nicodemus in v.3 are unavoidably and intentionally ambiguous because of the inherent double meaning of anōthen. It also fits a Johannine pattern of using such ambiguous language. The ambiguity of meaning is lost in English translations because the translators have to pick – and this favors – one meaning of anōthen in the text. At best they relegate the second meaning to a footnote. Translations have their limitations.

Neither understandings are meant to be primary or secondary but are meant to be heard simultaneously. Jesus’ expression “to be born anōthen, to be born from above/again” challenges Nicodemus to move beyond surface meanings to a deeper meaning. When English translations resolve the tension in Jesus’ words by reducing anōthen to one of its meanings, the challenge to Nicodemus (and to the reader) is lost. The intentional double meaning of anōthen must be kept in mind when reading this verse in order to discern Jesus’ full meaning and the nature of Nicodemus’s misunderstanding.

So – which is the better translation? This is a way of asking what is the answer Jesus intends as he asks the ambiguous question?  Let’s take a look. As to the word anōthen , the prefix ana (adverbial form: ano) generally means “up”. As in anabaino = “to go up” in contrast to katabaino – “to go down”. The adverb ano is used three times in John all in reference to something “up”.

  • 2:7 – They filled the jars with water to the brim (top)
  • 8:23 – “You belong to what is below [ek ton kato], I belong to what is above [ek ton ano], You belong to this world, but I do not belong to this world [ek tou kosmou].
  • 11:41 – Jesus raised his eyes up and said…

The suffix -then generally means “(motion) from (a place)”. It is used in pothen in v. 8. pou- = where? + -then = from — “You do not know from where the Spirit comes.” So, most literally, anōthen means “from up”. Besides its use in our text (vv. 3 & 7), it always has the sense “from up” in John.

  • 3:31 – The one who comes from above is above [epano] all. The one who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of earthly things. But the one who comes from heaven is above [epano] all.
  • 19:11 – You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above.
  • 19:23 – The garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom.

As you might infer, I favor “from above” as a primary meaning. But then language is fluid. In the context of Greek, as in English, there are idioms such as the phrase “from the top” which can mean “start from the beginning” or “do over”. So anōthen can also mean, “again” or “anew.”  Depending on how you understand the context will lead you to take one meaning as primary. But that is from the hearer’s perspective. From the speaker’s point of view, the very use of the word may well intend neither, but rather is the “bait” which will reveal the listener’s heart and understanding. What will Nicodemus hear?  Did Jesus mean/did Nicodemus understand “from above” (= from God) or  “again” (= a second time, starting over)?

As will (hopefully) become clearer, I understand this passage as Nicodemus being offered a choice – a spiritual choice or a more secular one – to be born again. Given that, while I understand and accept the question, “Have you been born again?” It is ironic (to me) that this question is rooted in Nicodemus’ misunderstanding.  Such are the limitations of translation and the power of the accepted narrative and popular expression.


Image credit: Rublev, Trinity icon, 15the century, Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, Moscow, Public Domain