At the expense of ruffling feathers in Washington, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is pushing ahead with a national referendum on joining the UN under the name "Taiwan."
Considering the somewhat frayed relationship between President Chen Shui-bian's (
However, the debate has highlighted an area of indecision within the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which in recent months has been experiencing an identity crisis as it tries to repackage itself as a "localized" party.
KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
This criticism is not surprising. However, the KMT has also grown increasingly mute in criticizing the DPP for using "Taiwan" instead of the "Republic of China."
Instead, Ma and certain KMT officials have been throwing around another theory: The national title isn't important when applying to international organizations as long as it gets Taiwan's foot in the door. Despite accusing DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (
KMT spokesperson Su Jun-pin (
KMT Secretary-General Wu Den-yi (
Meanwhile, Ma on Wednesday seemed equally unconcerned, saying that anything that allows the nation to return to international organizations, including the UN, should be given support. He went on to say that Taiwan should be "flexible" about its title.
He cited the WTO, in which Taiwan has been allowed to participate under the title of the "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu," as well as the International Olympic Committee, in which Taiwan has the title of "Chinese Taipei," as examples of Taiwan gaining membership through flexibility.
But Taiwan's title in these organizations does matter. It is not a trivial detail that can be brushed aside. Ma's willingness to accept any degrading and misleading name is misguided. His assertion that any name must respect Taiwan's dignity is at odds with his acceptance of any ludicrous title.
Gaining entry into every B-grade organization under an array of ridiculous names does little to assert sovereignty. Taiwan is better served by not participating in an organization rather than participating under a silly name. Taiwan, after all, is not merely a "customs territory."
While applying to international agencies under the name "Taiwan" does not usually meet with success -- as demonstrated by its WHO bid this spring -- it is important for Taiwan to maintain a standard.
And it is better to be rejected by the UN when applying as "Taiwan" than to be accepted under a name not befitting a sovereign nation.
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