Feb. 27 marked the 35th anniversary of the US-China Communique issued in Shanghai in 1972.
The communique laid the foundations for the US' "one China" policy, stating that: "The United States acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States Government does not challenge that position."
The problem is that today, 35 years later, great changes have occurred in the cross-strait situation, and more than 60 percent of Taiwan's population identify as Taiwanese.
Therefore, insisting on applying the communique's "one China" framework to the present day is inappropriate and furthermore is a challenge to the "status quo."
The recent name-change campaign is not aimed at breaking the "status quo."
Rather, it is a means of ensuring that this country's peaceful democracy remains that way.
Identification with Taiwan has long transcended the political divide.
This is a natural result of the public's strong identification with this country.
Last September, the Chinese newspaper Oriental Sports Daily described Taiwanese New York Yankees pitcher Wang Chien-ming (王建民) as a "Chinese" pitcher, immediately drawing strong criticism from Taiwanese baseball fans. This kind of dissatisfaction has nothing to do with Taiwanese independence, but Taiwanese identity.
If Taiwanese ultra-marathon specialist Kevin Lin (林義傑), who recently completed a trek across the Sahara Desert, were to be identified as a "Chinese" ultra-marathon specialist by Chinese and international media, many members of the public would again feel upset and protest.
Again, this would be unrelated to the issue of independence; instead, it is all about a natural and strong sense of national identity.
I am certain that the old English name for Taiwan's central bank did not help other countries think it was Taiwanese, and the same problem applied to discarded names for state-owned firms. We must give serious consideration to the cost of continuing to use confusing names for other companies.
This danger was well described by Democratic Progressive Party Chairman Yu Shyi-kun when he warned against "showing good will to the death."
When Taiwan goes all out to provide aid to diplomatic allies and Third World nations, the fact that the "Republic of China on Taiwan" is abbreviated to "China" makes locals think that the aid is provided by China, and not Taiwan.
Furthermore, even if the service and safety record of China Airlines, for example, were to achieve a reputation as among the world's best, the fact that many international passengers continue to mistake it for a Chinese airline means that Taiwanese are still not be able to take pride in their national carrier.
It is those who oppose these changes who are out of touch. These opponents should explain why Taiwan cannot proceed with the changes, rather than demand that proponents explain why it should be done.
In other words, these opponents should explain why it is necessary to use the name "China."
This is much more sensible than requiring supporters of the name-change campaign to explain why we should use the name "Taiwan."
Lo Chih-cheng is the director of the department of political science at Soochow University.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS