Never before in the history of the Olympics Games has a country receiving a gold medal been unable to hear its national anthem and see its national flag on display during the award ceremony. Optimists may say that sports and politics are separate matters. But for pessimistic thinkers, Taiwan's recent experience is cause for national sadness.
The country has already had a heated debate over the nation's name. All the names suggested -- "Taiwan, Republic of China" or "Taiwan, ROC" -- only show that Taiwanese are as much afraid of declaring independence as they are of being unified with China. Even as China arbitrarily puts down Taiwan in the international community, the nation still cannot consider a wording that doesn't include "China." People cannot help but ask: "Who are we?"
Who are we? is also the title of a new book by Samuel Huntington, a US political scientist whose theory about the clash of civilizations impressed global readers in early 90s. This time, instead of looking at international conflicts from a macro perspective, he focuses on internal US issues that arise from the coexistence of different ethnic groups. He criticizes recent Latin-American immigrants for their inability to leave behind their motherland and embrace the American dream. He argues that their maintenance of a strong ethnic identity -- one that is incompatible with that of the country's earlier immigrants -- will hamper progress.
Of course, we do not mean to adopt Huntington's view in its entirety. However, some of his points can be applied in the context of cross-strait relations. Political mistrust leads Beijing to constantly criticize the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government for its attempts to stop using the word "China" when referring to Taiwan. At the same time, Beijing blocks the use of the name Taiwan internationally. As a result, Taiwan is no longer called China, and China dares not let Taiwan be Taiwan.
Beijing's intention behind this is not difficult to grasp. It wants the Taiwanese people to feel confused about their own identity. Though this strategy may not lead to Taiwanese people identifying themselves with China, it prevents them from having a fixed identity and so makes it more difficult for Taiwanese people to establish their own country.
The establishment of a sovereign nationality requires collective will. Meanwhile, the population also relies on the country's power to direct and shape concepts surrounding its nationality. Therefore, in such an "imagined community," the collective force germinated from nationality must focus on building up a new country and dissolving the existing one. This is the most difficult step in the process of moving from the concept of "population" to a "nationality" and finally, to a sovereign "country."
China is attempting to interfere with Taiwan's collective will, thus staining its nationality and making the task of building a country nothing but a dream for the Taiwanese people. Beijing's international pressure to prevent calling Taiwan "Taiwan" is nothing but cultural hegemony. Unfortunately, rather than fight against such bullying, we jump into China's trap and thereby put our fate in its hands.
Obviously, name rectification is the only path to take to reach the goal of a sovereign country based on Taiwanese identity. If we don't call Taiwan "Taiwan," for generations to come, our children will never hear their national anthem or see their national flag in the Olympics. They will always wonder who, exactly, they are -- and that is the true sadness of being Taiwanese.
Wang Kun-yi is an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies of Tamkang University.
Translated by Jennie Shih
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The stocks of rare earth companies soared on Monday following news that the Trump administration had taken a 10 percent stake in Oklahoma mining and magnet company USA Rare Earth Inc. Such is the visible benefit enjoyed by the growing number of firms that count Uncle Sam as a shareholder. Yet recent events surrounding perhaps what is the most well-known state-picked champion, Intel Corp, exposed a major unseen cost of the federal government’s unprecedented intervention in private business: the distortion of capital markets that have underpinned US growth and innovation since its founding. Prior to Intel’s Jan. 22 call with analysts
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
International debate on Taiwan is obsessed with “invasion countdowns,” framing the cross-strait crisis as a matter of military timetables and political opportunity. However, the seismic political tremors surrounding Central Military Commission (CMC) vice chairman Zhang Youxia (張又俠) suggested that Washington and Taipei are watching the wrong clock. Beijing is constrained not by a lack of capability, but by an acute fear of regime-threatening military failure. The reported sidelining of Zhang — a combat veteran in a largely unbloodied force and long-time loyalist of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — followed a year of purges within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
RSS