本文嘗試提出一種「去祖國」的研究視角，以挑戰長期以來以祖國為中心的論述。過去對於國民黨僑務政策在台灣戰後發展的研究，論者都以祖國為論述中心，將僑務政策視為國民黨與海外華人延續過去革命情誼的工具，或將之看作國民黨為了保衛政權的手段；而在國外的海外華人研究領域中，學者們只偏重研究中國共產黨的僑務政策，對於國民黨僑務政策往往只視之為表演性的政治修辭，未能作更深入的分析。本文發軔於一個簡單的提問：為何僑務政策得以在二次戰後，在民族國家制度作為圭臬的時代氣氛中能推行成功？拒絕以祖國（即國民黨）為中心的角度來解釋僑務政策如何可能，本文憑藉Roger Brubaker所框構的概念架構，將僑務政策放在去殖民的政治脈絡中，了解海外僑社的多元種族政治如何銜接了祖國的政治招喚，以及在冷戰時期的地緣政治下，祖國性又如何在世界霸權的政治操弄下在台灣被重新建制。

This paper challenges the narrative of homeland as a central historical actor. In the existing literature, the post-war Overseas Chinese policy is either regarded as a historical legacy of the revolutionary partnership between the Kuomintang and the Overseas Chinese, or treated as an essential source of legitimacy for the exiled regime before 1979. Many scholars of East Asia prefer to focus only on the parallel policy in mainland China, dismissing Taiwan’s policy as mere political rhetoric. However, this paper starts from a simple question: how did this transnational practice fit within its larger historical context of decolonization and national formation? By extending the framework developed by Roger Brubaker, this paper illustrates how the homeland-ness of China was imposed on Taiwan through the interaction of ethnic politics in postcolonial Southeast Asia with the wider geopolitics of the Cold War.