Kim Yuen Martina Troxler
4 min
Kinmen, once a heavily militarized frontline between the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China, has undergone a significant transformation since the end of its battlefield administration in 1992. The island has shifted from a site of active defense to a tourist destination, where former bunkers, tunnels, and military infrastructure are repurposed for civilian use. This transition is not merely economic; it represents a fundamental change in how the island's past is curated and consumed in the present.
Tourism has brought diverse histories into focus, moving beyond the singular narrative of Cold War militarization. Kinmen’s landscape now features a mix of military ruins, ancestral halls, and Western-style houses that reflect a pre-Cold War history of maritime trade and overseas migration. The establishment of Kinmen National Park in 1995 institutionalized this shift, requiring the reinterpretation of military sites to make them accessible and meaningful to modern visitors. This process involves a constant tension between material continuity—the physical reality of the bunkers—and the changing stories told about them to different audiences, including tourists from both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
Commercialization has played a central role in this transformation, with local entrepreneurs turning battlefield imagery into souvenirs like steel knives forged from artillery shells and liquor bottles shaped like military gear. These products demonstrate that the commodification of war is not a top-down process but one driven by local businesses. Furthermore, the introduction of the 'Mini Three Links' in 2001 and the subsequent rise in mainland Chinese visitors have complicated the island's political landscape. Today, Kinmen serves as a site where broader cross-Strait geopolitics are negotiated through the practical, everyday questions of access, economic dependence, and the interpretation of shared history. The ongoing debate over a potential bridge to Xiamen highlights how Kinmen remains a contested space, caught between its identity as a former battlefield and its aspirations as a hub for regional exchange.
Sam: So a shared interest in the place may matter as much as the visitor's identity, and a geopolitical border starts to function as a leisure destination. What happens if the Xiamen-Kinmen bridge is built?
Alex: The authors treat that as the critical open question. If the bridge is completed, the frontline identity might dissolve into a peri-urban economic zone. The physical separation that anchors the current narrative would vanish, and the island's history would need re-curating.
Sam: It sounds like the model depends on a particular tension. The island has to be connected enough to profit and isolated enough to stay distinctive.
Alex: That's the constraint, and the authors stress the transition isn't irreversible. It stays contingent on the political climate in the Taiwan Strait.
Sam: Where I'd hesitate is the evidence base. The paper leans on qualitative observation and existing literature. There's no granular quantitative data on how visitor sentiment shifts over time.
Alex: That's the limitation that matters most. The caption changes and the knives are illustrative. The load-bearing contribution is the framework: sensuous materialism as the way these sites hold contested history without text. It's a framework for the mechanism, not a test of it, and the long-term economic sustainability of this tourism model is left open.
Sam: So the how is reasonably clear, and the future is tied to the geopolitics the island is trying to move past.
Alex: Yes. Kinmen is a place where the past keeps being re-curated to meet the economic and political demands of the present.
Alex: If you want the figures and the method choices we skipped, you can generate a deep dive of this paper. The paper has the rest either way.
Sam: Thanks for listening.