【Name 】 Peichun Han【Organization】 (at the time of the grant):
Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, Waseda University【Title of Research】
Cross-Border Identity and Multiculturalism in East Asia—
An Empirical Study on Taiwanese Diaspora in Contemporary Japan【Purpose of Research】
Nation States are confronted with a rising tide of human flows in the era of globalization.
Crossing borders becomes an universal phenomenon after the 1970s, which leads tomodern state’s “porous borders” ( 国 境 の 多 孔 化 ) (Hirano 2005). Transnational or
multicultural studies on crossing-border ethnicity in the West Europe and that in the US arethus relatively preeminent in terms of quantity and quality.

When it comes to East Asia,

Japan serves to be an interesting case for latest studies. Japan, widely considered to be asociety of racial and cultural homogeneity, faces an increasing influx of transmigrants, inparticular those from East Asia. Migration thus leads to a broad range of concerns in thecontemporary Japanese society.
While previous literatures of Chinese and Korean Diaspora are widely researched, thoseof Taiwanese Diaspora are far left behind in the associated scholarship.

This study

examines the cultural identity of a particular transmigrant group, the “newcomer Taiwanese”1
in Japan, through documentary review and the field research.

As sociologists andanthropologists claim, “immigrant networks and the associated social capital are no longer
confined to activities located primarily in the host society” (Portes and Guarnizo 1991,
Barbara 2000).

Taiwanese cross-borderers, as valuable social capital, significantly

contribute to economic, social and political development in home and host countries
mutually.

In addition, “through derived understandings of multiculturalism, migrants forgeand sustain multi-stranded social relations that link both societies of origin and settlement”(Basch 1994).

Sharing cultural legacies with China and Japan, the presence of Taiwanesetransmigrants in contemporary Japan serves as a transnational asset in the era ofmulticulturalism.

1 This study focuses on the group of Taiwanese who came to Japan after the conclusion of WWII.
Taiwanese Diaspora has a long history of settlement in Japan. According to Tai (1993), those Taiwanese
who came to Japan before WWII are distinguished as “old comers” whereas those who came after WWII
are categorized as “newcomers.”

【Content/Methodology of Research】
I.

Research Question

This study examines Taiwanese transmigrants’ cultural identity, through the investigationof their adaptation and socialization under the Japanese discourse of cultural commodity inEast Asia. The main questions of this study are as follows:
1. What are ethnic backgrounds of the newcomer Taiwanese? Are they indigenous people,
Taiwanese islanders or Hakkaness (those who came to Taiwan before 1949) or Taiwanese
mainlanders (those who came to Taiwan after 1949)?
2. For what purpose did the newcomer Taiwanese come to Japan during 1949—19962? And
what are the push and pull factors and the patterns composed by the factors? (see 表（あ）and Table (A))
3. Is there correlation between cultural identity of the newcomer Taiwanese and effect ofJapanese colonization? Can the correlation be drawn from their political preferences orideology in favor of Taiwanese independence or unification with China?
4. Does settlement in Japan deconstruct or reconstruct cultural identity of the newcomer
Taiwanese? If so, what factors contribute to the reconstruction?
Wu (2004) studies Japanese orphans left behind in China after WWII and concludes thepull and push factors as follows.

She divides those main factors into internal and external

drivers as 表(あ 1) shows. Furthermore, she analyzes the factors and categorizes thepatterns of Japanese orphans in China as proactive and passive types in 表（あ２）asfollows.
表（あ１）日本人中国定着理由の図式
I．中国へのプル要因

II.日本からのプッシュ要因

内の要因

a.中国社会で大事されたこと

イ.中国人として差別されること

外の要因：主要因

b. 中国で社会的地位をロ.いい仕事は見つからない築いていること
：副要因

こと

c.中国側の人へ恩返し

ハ.日本側の親族の帰国反対

表（あ２）中国の定着の理由の図式
積極型定着（I—a） + (I—b)

消極型定着(II—イ)

2+ (I—c)+（II—ロ）+（II—ハ）

According to Pon (1997) “Many scholars argue that Taiwan was a authoritarian regime under theKuomintang ( the KMT 国民党) administration during 1949—1996.” 1949 is the year that the KMTretreated from the Mainland to the Formosa island; 1996 is the year that Li Tang-Hui (李登輝) took overpower.

(呉万虹 2004、中国残留日本人の研究—移住、漂流、定着の国際関係論）
Based on the framework of Wu’s study, I investigate pull and push factors of Taiwanesemigrants in Japan.

I also divide those main factors into internal and external motivation

drivers of migrants’mobility in Table (A1).

Furthermore, I categorize the patterns ofTaiwanese migrants in Japan as proactive and passive types in the Table (A2) as follows.
Table (A1) Analysis of the newcomer Taiwanese in Japan
I．Pull factor to Japan

II. Push factor from Taiwan

Internal factor

a. Cultural /Educational Attraction

i. Social/Political Dissatisfaction

External factor

b. Ideal Employment

ii. Displeasing employmentc. Good social networks or/and familyiii. Poor social networks

relationshipfamily relationship

Table (A2) Types of Newcomer Taiwanese in Japan
Proactive type（I—a） + (I—b)

Passive type(II—i)+ (I—c)+ （II—ii）+（II—iii）(Han 2006)

II.

Hypotheses

This research argues that cross-border identity might not be bounded coherently, but are
subject to modification in accordance with the cultural practice and social context. The
three main hypotheses are as follows:
1. Part of cultural identity of the newcomer Taiwanese represents to be the legacy ofJapanese colonization. To maintain Japanese-ness remarks not only as a strategy foradvantageous survival in Japanese society, but also as nostalgia for colonial period.
2. Chinese-ness is embedded in cultural identity, employment or live practice of thenewcomer Taiwanese.

It appears to be particularly significant among the firstgeneration and those who attain less education in Japan.
3. The newcomer Taiwanese have constructed their hybridized identity (HI), varied in
the degree of composed Chinese-ness and Japanese-ness combination.

The locationand distribution of HIi is highly correlated with one’s social-economic status (high/lowclass) in Japan as well as the life settings (public/private sphere) in which one practicesactivity.

The following fig.1 of a three dimensional analysis illustrates the idea ofor/andTaiwan’s migrants hybridized identity in Japan.

Fig1. A Three Dimensional Analysis: Taiwanese Migrants’ Hybridized Identity in Japan

High Socio-Economic Class (y)* HI1Public Sphere (z)Chinese-ness (x)Private Sphere (z)* HI2Japanese-ness (x)Low Socio-Economic Class (y)【Methodology】
This research will conduct through three approaches: history approach, field study andtheory examination.

Based on literature review, this study looks into history of the socialand political background with regard to Taiwanese transmigrants in Japan. It furthers toexplicate how social processes enter into the construction of cross-borderers’ hybridized
cultural identity through interactions and interviews with the focus group.

In addition, it

employs approach of culture studies and sociolinguistic analysis to perceive the focus
group’s language and networking practice as a core of cultural adaptation and socialization.
Through the methodologies stated above, this dissertation examines the ways that thenewcomer Taiwanese preserve, deconstruct and/or reconstruct their cultural identity throughinterfacing with people of varied backgrounds in Japan.
【Conclusion/Observations】
A. Employment and Social Network
Ethnic Chinese migrants and overseas brought with them well-developed mechanism ofsocial and economic organization which influenced both patterns of settlement and themaintenance of a distinct identity.

None the less, provincial, kinship or businessassociations continued to play an important role in Chinese/Taiwanese social life in Japan.

Chinese and Taiwanese were disenfranchised, obliged to register, and were excluded
from a wide range of social and welfare benefits as well as employment or promotion in
the public sector.

These and other exclusions reinforced traditional reliance on

Chinese/Taiwanese ethnic associations and areas of employment and social life.
Early comers of Chinese/Taiwanese generally remained in Chinatown enclaves as
self-employed shopkeepers or restaurants.

Employees and business contacts continued

to be drawn from among either relatives or acquaintances from the same province oforigin, while Chinese/Taiwanese enterprise continued to raise capital using provincial ties.
Those provincial associations maintained their traditional functions as social clubs andbenevolent societies, providing hospitals, chambers of commerce and schools.

WhenChinese or Taiwanese found it difficult to obtain loans from Japanese banks until 1970s,
the business associations sponsored the foundation of ethnic Chinese financial aid
institutions and systems to provide similar service as a bank.
In terms of employment, like mainland Chinese, a number of Taiwanese owned
restaurants or sold groceries or general merchandise, while others were merchants,
barbers, or chefs (Uchida 1949).

In addition to the traditional way of Chineseemployment, newcomer Taiwanese held occupation ranging from construction work tomedicine, dentistry, teaching and journalism. They also went into such areas as realestate, pearl cultivation, or management of hotel business.
Newcomer Taiwanese are particularly active in trading.

They made a lot of profits byimporting bananas and other kind of fruits from Taiwan since the 1950s (Nagata andTanaka 1962b:38.)

Joint ventures in business between newcomer Taiwanese and local

Japanese increased as the latter came to realize business talent of the former.

Suchcooperation was often based on inter-ethnic marriage (Nagata and Tanaka 1962b:55).
B. History of Transitional Backgrounds
Because of war, colonial experience, Taiwanese migrants in Japan present its
uniqueness in the discussion of ambiguous legal status, which barely covered by theprevious studies on those flowing to the US or Southeast Asia.

In the aftermath of theWWII, the Taiwanese in Japan encountered ambiguity over their sense of belongings
legally and ethnically.

Their legal status was not clarified until the San Francisco Peace

Treaty and the Sino-Japan Treaty concluded in 1952.

During the years between 1945and 1952, those Taiwanese could not be categorized either as Chinese or as Japanese.
Taiwanese were regarded as “non-Japanese” yet were still considered to be “Japanesecitizens.” There was a legal distinction between the Chinese and the Taiwanese.

The

former was from country of the winner’s side, whereas the latter was categorized as thepeople of the “third nation”, which was neither a winner nor a loser of the war.
The other problem appeared to be in the “koseki” (family registration) system via
inter-ethnic marriage. Those Japanese women who married to Taiwanese men by 1960
were obligated to become Chinese citizens based on the old Nationality Law of Japan.
The ambiguities and vicissitudes of their legal status also forged complex identities
in-between being Japanese and Chinese.

Although the legal labeling and self

definition of Taiwanese in Japan changed, the distinction between them and the rest of
the Chinese in Japan kept to a large extent in interpersonal relationships.

SomeTaiwanese were proud of being “Japanese” and despised Chinese from the mainland bycalling the latter “shinajin” (支那人), with a derogatory connotation.

The politicalupheaval and ethnic conflict inside Taiwan Island also forged the self-segregation ofethnic Chinese migrants.

While some realized their wish to return to be Chinese, someof them keep question marks in their self-identification.
In the eyes of the Taiwanese who had gone through industrialization and other social
development under Japanese colonial practice, ill conduct by later Chinese ruler appeared
not only morally bad but primitive.

Due to the KMT government, they rather held nostalgia

toward the colonial period with favor of Japan.

There was a saying “dogs left, and pigscame.” to describe e the ruling authority in Taiwan.

Dogs referred to Japanese, who

exercised sever controls over Taiwanese, whereas KMT Chinese were as dirty and stupid aspigs.

Therefore, during 1950s, a great number of Taiwanese students flowed into Japanand sought to continue career or to establish life in Japan. They were also involved innumbers of overseas independent activity after then.