According to the Webster's dictionary, the status quo is defined as "the existing state of affairs." This means that the status quo is not stagnant but changes with time and circumstance; otherwise it becomes a past state or history.
Since the US cut off diplomatic ties with the Republic of China (ROC) in 1979, US officials consistently have been calling the country "Taiwan." Secretary of State Colin Powell once called Taiwan the "ROC" -- only by mistake.
Ironically, even the State Department official who opposed the proposed name rectification to "Taiwan" presumably used the term "Taiwan." The US has "American Institute in Taiwan," "Taiwan Relations Act" and so on, all named after Taiwan.
These names are clear and precise. If they were misnamed as "Washington Institute in Taipei," "Chinese Taipei Relations Act" or "China Relations Act," there would be a lot of confusion and misinterpretations. These are the very reasons why the name rectification to "Taiwan" is urgently needed.
The Taiwanese have suffered enough from so many historical or improper names imposed on the country. They will be happy to see "Taiwanese Institute in the US," for example.
The US, China and the rest of the world all call Taiwan "Taiwan." This is multilateral and universal. Why can't Taiwan call itself "Taiwan?" After all, this name reflects the true status quo.
Charles Hong
Columbus, Ohio
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath