The day after the apology: A critical discourse analysis of President Tsai’s national apology to Taiwan’s indigenous peoples

In 2016, Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen officially apologised to the island’s indigenous peoples. This national apology not only plays a persuasive role in informing the general public about the historical wrongdoings inflicted on the Taiwanese aborigines, but also constitutes a therapeutic and res...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Discourse studies 2021-02, Vol.23 (1), p.84-101
Main Authors: Chu, Rong-Xuan, Huang, Chih-Tung
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Apologies
Constitutional courts
Critical discourse analysis
Discourse analysis
Ideology
Indigenous peoples
Land tenure
National reconciliation
Native peoples
Political discourse
Presidents
Reconciliation
Restitution
Rites & ceremonies
Speech
Supreme courts
Transitional justice
Tribal leaders
Tsai Ing-wen
Victims
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In 2016, Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen officially apologised to the island’s indigenous peoples. This national apology not only plays a persuasive role in informing the general public about the historical wrongdoings inflicted on the Taiwanese aborigines, but also constitutes a therapeutic and restorative role in the process of reconciliation with the indigenous victims. This article provides a critical discourse analysis of President Tsai’s apology. In particular, it examines the power and ideology embedded in both the speech and the related ceremony, and is supplemented with extracts from interviews with a cross-section of key stakeholders, such as a former Constitutional/Supreme Court Justice, indigenous/tribal leaders and members/staff/advisers from the Presidential Office Indigenous Historical Justice and Transitional Justice Committee. The analysis reveals that, despite President Tsai’s apology and reconciliation policies, instead of facilitating reconciliation, the apology appears to exacerbate the long-standing latent tension between indigenous and non-indigenous groups. While the apology opens a window for reconciliation, a higher level of commitment is required to promote structural and systemic changes, such as land restitution, before the apology can be deemed adequate.
ISSN:1461-4456
1461-7080
DOI:10.1177/1461445620942875