What is the raison d'etre of the government? Is it to appease the PRC or to serve its own citizens? If the answer is clear, then we can simply ignore what Beijing thinks about the government's plan to add the word "Taiwan" to the cover of ROC passports. It is -- to use one of Beijing's favorite phrases -- an internal affair.
As long as the people think the addition of the word "Taiwan" to their passports will help them when traveling then no party or lawmaker who loves this country should oppose the proposal.
There have been many reports over the years from the government's representative offices overseas as well as first-hand accounts about Taiwanese unhappy that customs and immigration officials in other countries have mistakenly thought that they were from the PRC -- and consequently eyed them with suspicion that is usually accorded citizens of that country. The most recent example took place in Germany, where several Taiwanese were humiliated by local officials who thought they were PRC nationals. The government cannot allow such incidents to continue -- especially as the problem is so easily remedied.
Beijing is sure to launch another media offensive against the plan, condemning the government for pushing "Taiwan independence." But there is no reason to pay any attention to whatever vitriol that may come from the Chinese Communist Party.
There is equally no reason to heed complaints from those political parties and lawmakers who voice China's viewpoint by accusing the foreign ministry of trying to stir up domestic turmoil and increase cross-strait tensions. For example, KMT legislative caucus leader Liu Cheng-hung (
It's hard to understand why the opposition parties and pro-unification people dislike such a well-crafted proposal. The fact that the government does not plan to eliminate "Republic of China" from the passport shows it is listening to public opinion. If adding "Taiwan" will make travel more convenient for Taiwanese -- and at the same time satisfy the pro-independence camp -- why oppose it.
This appears to be an arrangement that should keep everyone happy. Nevertheless, whether the proposal will gain approval from the opposition-dominated legislature is still a question open to debate.
Putting "Taiwan" on passports simply reflects the fact that the ROC is based in Taiwan -- a fact long trumpeted by the former KMT government. It will also allow this country to be more clearly differentiated from China. Such a measure will help people in this global village clearly see the impressive political, economic and cultural achievements of an independent Taiwan. This will give the public more dignity and self-confidence in the international community, while at the same time preventing damage to the nation's dignity.
If the opposition ignores public opinion and blocks legislative approval, then the electorate should respond accordingly when they go to the polls for next year's presidential election.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS