We have all witnessed how quickly the People’s Republic of China (PRC) broke its most recent promise to refer to Taiwan as Zhonghua Taibei (中華台北, Chinese Taipei) and not Zhongguo Taibei (中國台北, Taipei, China) at the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.
This broken promise followed on the heels of an earlier failed pledge to use this term. But another issue now faces Taiwan, that of UN membership. Not to worry, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) Cub Scouts are again hard at work, flying by the seat of their pants.
Since 1993, Taiwan has made an annual application to regain membership in the UN. What name to use is an issue. This is the name game and charade that Taiwan plays with the hypocrites of the world who trade and make money with Taiwan as an equal, who have cultural exchanges with Taiwan as equals, who do everything else with Taiwan as equals but who cannot bring themselves to officially recognize Taiwan as a diplomatic equal because that would jeopardize their ability to make money from China.
Traditionally Taiwan had used the name “Republic of China” for entry. As this had always been shot down by China, the Taiwanese government switched to the name “Taiwan” last year — with no greater success. This year, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Henry Chen (陳銘政) said the Ma government would not follow the strategy of the previous administration under Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). Fair enough, each administration has it own call, so what brainstorm will they come up with for this annual issue?
Ma, of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), was elected president in March and he and his Cabinet took office in May. It is now August and Taiwan’s application to the UN, a standard annual priority in Taiwan’s affairs regardless of administration, is due. Media reports said Ma picked his Cabinet based on their capability and seasoned experience: So why are they stalling?
Unfortunately the foreign ministry is stuck and seems to be taking its lead from “ostrich” Ma. The government has yet to decide on a name as it does not want to risk offending China. It has also falsely claimed that it cannot use the same name employed in previous UN applications after two local referendums on UN accession this year failed to pass. That logic tests the mind and reveals the typical fudge factor Ma uses to skirt responsibility for his actions.
A little background is in order on this. Taiwan conducted the two referendums on UN membership in March. For a referendum to pass it must first have the participation of 50 percent of the nation’s eligible voters (not votes cast at the time). After meeting that requirement, the referendum must also be approved by 50 percent of those who voted plus one.
This places a high burden on any referendum since, as in many countries, getting a 50 percent turnout for a referendum is difficult. If a referendum fails to pass that bar, then that topic cannot be brought up again as a referendum for three years. This says nothing about the nation or national policy; it only says the topic cannot be raised again for three years.
Taiwan has never had any referendum that passed that bar. One of the two UN referendums this year was initiated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) asking whether Taiwan should apply for entry to the international organization under the name Taiwan. The KMT, faking a show of Taiwanese consciousness, countered this with a referendum on entering under any suitable name. For them the name Taiwan is anathema.
The KMT was clearly faking because soon after the party proposed a referendum and obtained the necessary signatures to support the holding of such a referendum, it urged voters to boycott it as well as the DPP referendum. Why? Boycotts lower the possibility of passing the first bar — that of getting 50 percent of the eligible voters.
The KMT did not want to risk voter confusion as to which was the more appropriate referendum, and it certainly did not want a referendum with the name Taiwan passing. It was better to burn all bridges and lower the eligible voters for both. In this way, Ma could use the KMT to block Taiwan’s wish for entry to the UN although technically he could not be accused of voting against it.
Not surprisingly, both referendums failed to pass the required threshold. More than 6.2 million people voted in the referendums, which received 87 and 94 percent voter approval, but they did not meet the first requirement that more than 50 percent (8.6 million voters) of the 17.3 eligible voters should participate in the vote.
This is the hypocritical obfuscation and fudge factor that Ma always hides behind. With this background, the foreign ministry recently floated the idea of using “Chinese Taipei” — the non-entity name given the Olympic team — for the nation’s application to join the UN.
The deadline for application is tomorrow.
Non-plussed, Henry Chen has been quoted as saying: “We will have a strategy by then, I cannot say what it will be, but there is still time.”
Whipping up a strategy in a short time might not be a problem, especially as much of the ministry has been in place through both administrations.
But to think that the ministry can come up with a name that China will approve other than that of a PRC satellite is ludicrous. To think that it can placate China is ludicrous. To think that the issue will go away if the ministry hides its head in the sand is ludicrous.
The problem in this matter is China and has always been China; it is not the previous Taiwanese administration that Ma keeps trying to paint as the bad guy, nor is it the name.
Ma’s team should be man enough and continue to expose the hypocrisy of the UN, whose charter says that people have the right to self determination. It should not false-heartedly try to find a denigrating name that China would accept. Simply tell the Chinese Emperor that he has no clothes. If the question of name is still a problem, then what name should they use? A friend suggested a different name for the ministry, one that reflects the attitude of Ma and his pie-in-the-sky
NITWITS, yes that name has a ring to it; it certainly captures the spirit and character of Ma’s Cub Scouts and “new” flexible kowtowing strategy in diplomacy.
Jerome Keating is a Taiwan-based writer.
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS