Because of the limited size of Nauru's international airport, some sections of the Taiwanese media were unable to accompany President Chen Shui-bian (
Reporters from a certain cable TV station reportedly decided to display their dissatisfaction by boycotting the whole trip. This kind of righteous indignation is fair enough, but I am more interested in the insight this episode provides on the sorry state of Taiwan's diplomatic affairs.
Why is it that Taiwan is so diplomatically limited that we have to treasure a presidential visit to a country where only two aircraft can land at the national airport at any given time?
Why is it so difficult for Taiwan to participate in the international community?
The reason is that the Republic of China (ROC) withdrew from the UN 35 years ago this Oct. 26. As a result of this decision, our head of state must deal with Chinese pressure every time he makes an international visit; the WHO is bullied by China; the US is the only nation that dares sell Taiwan arms; and Taiwan has to endure humiliation by APEC.
I have never seen a well balanced report of this situation in the Taiwanese media. In the past, the propaganda machine of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government's educational system taught us that, to save face, the government had no choice but to walk out of the UN -- that the world body was not big enough to hold both the People's Republic of China and the ROC.
Historical documents, however, show that the dictator Chiang Kai-shek (
In 1970, the year before the ROC withdrew from the UN, then US president Richard Nixon promised in a meeting with then premier Yan Chia-kan (
Even French president Charles de Gaulle sent a telegram to Chiang urging him not to make a rash decision to leave the world body.
To save face, Chiang said that he'd rather stand on principle than accept humiliation, preferring to instead turn Taiwan into an orphan in the international community. Abandoned, oppressed and threatened by Chinese missiles, the Taiwanese people are now constantly in crisis.
In their eagerness to punish Chen for his family's perceived wrongdoings, many academics have lately been talking about transitional justice. As I see it, true transitional justice entails settling past injustices. Yet in the current debate, the buck surprisingly stops at former president Lee Teng-hui (
No one has the courage to challenge the institutional violence applied by Chiang. Despite Chiang's betrayal of the nation, even a change to the name of an airport bearing his name is today enough to set off a nationwide argument.
The fact that Chiang was a dictator is irrefutable, and changing the name of the airport in Taoyuan would be in keeping with the spirit of transitional justice.
Why don't I hear the same people who have been singing the praises of transitional justice come out in support of this change?
Tien Chiu-chin is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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
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