Should Taiwan continue to use the name "Republic of China?" Set off by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' decision to evaluate the feasibility of adding the word "Taiwan," in English, to passport covers, the question is undergoing heated debate.
Before all the self-proclaimed "patriots" congregate to protest the ministry's decision with their weeping, singing of the national anthem, and waving of the national flag, we want to point out that there is really no need for over-reaction. The political status and sovereignty of this country will remain unchanged, irrespective of what name it takes on.
As for anyone drawing an analogy between the current debate and President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) national policy advisor Alice King's (金美齡) comment about the"Republic of China," they are comparing apples with oranges. King was not merely displeased with the name of the country, but had refused to concede the legitimacy of the Republic of China government as the government of Taiwan altogether -- and, at least until the early 1990s, would have been right to do so. In contrast, whatever the foreign ministry's ultimate decision, it deals only with the country's name.
With the above point clarified, we can now evaluate the matter from a pragmatic standpoint. Independence fundamentalists' stubborn hatred for the name "Republic of China" is , frankly, beyond our comprehension. After all, what's in a name? What matters is the sovereignty that Taiwan currently enjoys; as long as it can receive the international recognition and respect it rightfully deserves, its name is inconsequential.
The foreign ministry's claim that the name "Republic of China" is often confused with "People's Republic of China (PRC)" is an understatement. The relationship between PRC, China, and ROC, Taiwan are so complicated that not many foreigners truly understand the distinction between the two. At the height of the EP-3 surveillance plane imbroglio, many Taiwanese in the US reportedly became the target of verbal attacks, because they were mistaken as Chinese from the PRC. In fact, when hackers from the US and China began attacking each other's Web sites, many Taiwanese Web sites were mistakenly attacked by American hackers.
Even Taiwan's own allies have been known to get confused by these two names. For example, a few years ago, Lien Chan (連戰) was relatively embarrassed during his visit to a Latin American ally when he was greeted with the PRC flag and national anthem.
Conversely, the name "Taiwan" avoids all the confusion. In fact, the level of international recognition enjoyed by the name "Taiwan" is much greater than "Republic of China." This is of course because most international media use the name "Taiwan" in their news coverage to avoid confusion. And what foreigner hasn't purchased something "made in Taiwan?"
The name "Taiwan" is also far preferable to another name often used at international functions and organizations, that is, "Chinese Taipei." This is doubly inaccurate. "Taipei" is simply the name of a city; it cannot be used for the country, and, of course it is not Chinese, it is Taiwanese.
However, formally changing our nation's name entails many practical difficulties including, but not limited to, a necessary amendment to the Constitution. Strong reaction from opposition parties, not to mention hysterical shrieks from China are also considerations.
Under the circumstances, the foreign ministry's proposal to simply add the word "Taiwan" to passport covers is a useful first step, at least until the Taiwanese political class can get enough backbone to make more substantial changes.
As for opposition parties prepared to lash out at the DPP administration, don't forget it was the KMT that first began promoting the name "Republic of China on Taiwan."
When I visited Taiwan last summer, I called on the nation to use its status as a technology superpower to build superweapons. It is obvious to me as I return a year later that Taiwan is now answering that call. By 2030, Taiwan envisions a domestic drone hub, capable of producing large quantities of drones per year. The nation continues to tighten cooperation across the private sector, scientific researchers and the elected government, on creating new and innovative production avenues for defense, while efforts to become central to the “democratic supply chain” are only increasing. Anduril is seeing all of these positive
Singaporean former Prime Minister and current senior minister Lee Hsien- Loong(李顯龍) last month stood on Chinese soil and told Beijing that Singapore cooperates because of “shared interests”, not because of common “ethnic descent,” a significant statement that has upended China’s cognitive warfare tactics of “ethnic nationalism.” Along with using its military buildup and economic growth to expand its international dominance, China has long deployed ethnic politics to promote the idea that all ethnic Chinese around the world, regardless of citizenship, share a tight bond with the Chinese motherland, by which it means the regime of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) in San Francisco on Tuesday last week said if she had not met with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), she would have been “just a plain” and “even negligible” KMT chairperson, bluntly signaling the role she is playing in her visit to the US — Beijing’s messenger from Taiwan. Cheng and her delegation arrived in the US on Monday last week for a two-week visit across five major cities. Her party said the group is scheduled to meet with US lawmakers, officials, policy experts and businesspeople. Before departing, Cheng said her trip
In 1935, the German Reich led by the National Socialist Party officially created the Nuremberg Race Laws, a “legal cage”, for German Jews, stripping them of citizenship, criminalizing their personal relationships, barring them from public life, and transforming them into stateless subjects and isolating them from the rest of society. Similarly, in March 2026, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) National People’s Congress adopted the “Promoting Ethnic Unity and Progress” law, which represents the most significant shift in Chinese domestic governance since the era of Mao Zedong (毛澤東). Ostensibly designed as domestic legislation to manage China’s 56 officially recognized ethnic groups,
RSS