Every once in a while, an American think-tank figure pops up with a new idea on how to resolve the tension across the Taiwan Strait. In early 1998, it was the Kennedy School of Government's Joseph Nye who proposed his infamous "Taiwan deal." According to Nye, Taiwan was supposed to foreswear its independence in exchange for some kind of vague "higher international profile." A year later, Kenneth Lieberthal, who recently stepped down as head of East Asian affairs on Bill Clinton's National Security Council, launched his equally noxious and onerous "interim agreement" trial balloon.
This time, David Shambaugh, a pro-China academic at the George Washington University, wrote in the January/February 2001 issue of Foreign Affairs that the concept of "confederation" offers the best hope for an ultimate solution, as "it would bring the island back into the sovereign fold of China while guaranteeing substantial autonomy to Taiwan."
First, we must point out that Shambaugh's basic premise is all wrong, since Taiwan was never in the sovereign fold of the People's Republic of China (PRC) to begin with. Certainly, the KMT came from China, but mainlanders who arrived in Taiwan along with the KMT and their descendants constitute only 15 percent of Taiwan's population.
The large majority of the people of Taiwan are native Taiwanese, and come from a background which identifies with Taiwan and rejects any sovereignty claim by China over Taiwan. When the KMT came to Taiwan under Chiang Kai-shek's (
Instead, the people of Taiwan were subjected to 38 years of martial law and oppression by the Chinese KMT. The KMT, for many years, clung to the outdated notion that they -- as the Republic of China -- were the rightful government of all of China. While the Taipei government dropped these claims in the early 1990s, Taiwan's future is being held hostage by anachronistic counterclaims across the Taiwan Strait.
Isn't it time for American scholars to stop perpetuating these outdated notions and help bring about an acceptance of Taiwan, by China and the rest of the international community, as a full and equal member of the family of nations? The most obvious -- and only fair -- resolution is to normalize relations with Taiwan and accord full diplomatic ties to a deserving nation of 23 million people.
The US and other nations need to emphasize time and again that it is the right of the Taiwanese people to determine their own future, without interference, threats or intimidation from China. And if the people of Taiwan wish to be accepted as an independent nation named "Taiwan," that choice should be respected and even applauded by the international community.
Chen Mei-chin is an editor of the Taiwan Communique
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US