Changing the nation's anachronistic name to better reflect its current reality is a reasonable action the government could take. Until recently President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) led us to believe that he agreed. In last year's election he stated as much. Now he believes such a desire is "delusional."
I wonder what else he would define in the same way? Is drafting a national Constitution that reflects the nation's political reality now deemed by Chen to be delusional? Or what about holding in one's heart a patriotic love for one's country, if that country is Taiwan?
It makes you wonder. In Chen's "new Taiwan," apparently any action, belief or statement that offends or upsets China is now to be considered in much the same way.
Yet isn't it Chen who is being delusional? He is deceiving himself and the people of Taiwan if he thinks appeasement and expressions of goodwill toward China will produce anything but more intense hostility, more vitriolic condemnation and preparations for war.
Dictatorships always interpret conciliatory actions by democratic states as signs of weakness to be exploited ruthlessly. It's almost a natural law.
Has Chen forgotten what China is capable of? The statistics on genocide are readily available. Victims of the Nazis: 17 million; of the Chinese Nationalists: 10.2 million; of the former Soviet Union: a staggering 61.9 million; and of the Chinese Communist Party: 38.7 million and counting.
I don't believe China can be dissuaded from attacking Taiwan. It has gone beyond that point. It certainly is not about preventing independence -- not any more. It's about punishing Taiwan for the humiliation and insults China believes it has suffered.
R.J. Rummel, in China's Bloody Century, argues that the root cause of genocide is "arbitrary, undisciplined power in the hands of tyrants, and where such power is centralized and unchecked, the possibility exists that it will be used to kill in unprecedented numbers in pursuit of the goals of ethnic-racial purity, or national unity, or greater national glory."
The "Greater China" vision and Chinese national stability and unity have been the mantra in China for more than 30 years. Although the Chinese regime's manic obsession with Taiwan is unlikely to reach the extent of genocide, its meaning has become undeniable.
For China it is simple: Taiwan must be punished.
And Chen's pathetic, white-flag "10 point consensus" has virtually guaranteed that this will occur.
Stephen Carter
Taichung
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS