Only two days before a proposal is made in the UN General Assembly for the nation's entry into that organization, very little grassroots support of the bid has been in evidence. In the past, campaigns supporting the UN bid have been labeled activities of over-zealous Taiwanese independence fundamentalists, which may partially explain this year's lukewarm response. However, this perception could not be more mistaken.
Regardless of whether one supports or opposes future unification with China, no self-respecting citizen of this country can deny the sovereignty Taiwan currently enjoys. It is also a plain fact that the 23 million people residing on this island are entirely unrepresented at the UN. Even pro-unificationists cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that the People's Republic of China (PRC) does not and has not ever governed Taiwan. For that reason alone the PRC is completely inadequate and incapable of representing the people of Taiwan at the UN.
No sane person in Taiwan, be they supporters of unification or of independence, can possibly trust China to represent their interests. The PRC's hostility toward Taiwan and, on a more personal level, everyone on this island is all too amply demonstrated by the large number of missiles targeting Taiwan and recent Chinese moves to drive foreign investors away at a time when the Taiwanese economy is rapidly deteriorating.
So unless the government of Taiwan successfully opens the UN door, the people of Taiwan will continue to be underrepresented within the international community.
That is something everyone on this island should find offensive, when virtually every other country in the world has a voice at the UN.
The pro-unification media have had virtually no coverage of this year's UN bid. This comes as little surprise. But what about all those so-called patriotic politicians and lawmakers? Why have they all been silent? The only interpretation possible for such a lack of interest is their total disregard for the dignity and interests of the nation's people.
Taiwan's government has made a number of pragmatic changes to this year's UN bid. The most noteworthy breakthrough perhaps is dropping long outdated and suicidal rhetoric that the future of the two sides across the Taiwan Strait be jointly decided by "the people on the two sides." Why people on the other side of the Taiwan Strait should be invited to decide the future of people here defies logic and common sense.
Another breakthrough is the use of the name "Taiwan" to cross-reference the "Republic of China." It makes sense for our nation to enter the UN under the name "Taiwan" for the same reason that China has always maintained its UN membership under the name "China." As the PRC is the only government representing the member "China," the ROC would be the only government representing the member "Taiwan." As UN membership belongs to countries rather than the governments representing those countries, why would Taiwan enter the UN under the name "ROC" in the first place?
Again, using the name "Taiwan" should be merely a matter of common sense, irrespective of one's stance on unification. After all, under what other name could this country enter the UN? The name "China" is simply out of the question. Not only is that name already taken, but it would also be inconsistent with reality.
Only when the people of Taiwan put aside their differences and focus on UN entry can this country have a real chance of gaining admission.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under