It appears that the controversy over comments made by Jiang Ping (江平), head of China’s delegation to the Tokyo Film Festival, has come to an end. China’s Taiwan Affairs Office has said the incident was unfortunate and attributed Jiang’s remarks to a lack of communication, while the Executive Yuan has happily designated Jiang’s overt rudeness a matter of personal behavior. That it seems is that, except for the fact that no one really believes such politically expedient assertions to be actually true.
If Jiang’s outburst was an isolated incident, then how do we explain the Taiwanese student studying in South Korea who was chased and beaten up by a group of 30 Chinese students when she displayed the Republic of China (ROC) flag after winning a Korean speech competition in December last year?
How about the decision at the Venice Film Festival in 2007 to label Taiwanese movies such as Lust, Caution (色戒), Blood Brothers (天堂口), Just in Love (幫幫我,愛神) and The Most Distant Course (最遙遠的距離), as films from “Taiwan, China” under pressure from Beijing.
Or there is Taiwanese competitor Liu You-chen (劉祐辰), who was insulted by Chinese participants at the World Cyber Games in Seattle in 2007 after he showed the ROC flag when receiving his bronze medal?
Any random search on the Internet or cursory survey asking about the experiences of overseas Taiwanese students would instantly disprove the Executive Yuan’s claim that this was “an isolated incident.”
Anyone in his or her right mind knows perfectly well that Jiang’s remarks were simply the tip of the iceberg and appeasement cannot possibly be the best approach to such challenges to the nation’s sovereignty.
We cannot but wonder, if as the Taiwan Affairs Office said the incident was the result of a lack of communication, what would have been the result of “proper communication?”
Will it ever be possible for competitors and delegates from our nation taking part in international events to be referred to as Taiwanese and nothing else?
Over the years, the government has rarely, if ever, indicated to Beijing that it will simply not tolerate similar acts of rudeness.
Although Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) seemed to take a tougher stance on the Jiang controversy by saying on the legislative floor that he supported a proposal made by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators to list Jiang as persona non grata, this does not mean the KMT Government government intends to follow through on the lawmakers’ plan. Indeed, Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman James Chang (章計平) declined on Tuesday to comment further on the issue.
One cannot help but wonder if the plan was not deliberately concocted to temporarily appease Taiwanese anger, only to be quietly shelved when the brouhaha dies down.
The KMT administration must publicly demonstrate that it is committed to defending the nation’s dignity and it can do this by fully supporting a legislative resolution to sanction Jiang, and endorsing a Democratic Progressive Party proposal to demand an apology from China.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said in a speech in Tainan yesterday that China should treat Taiwan with benevolence while Taiwan should interact with China with wisdom.
True perhaps, but wisdom means knowing when to play tough instead of constantly backing down when the nation’s sovereignty is challenged.
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