Not long ago, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said: “Taiwan is the Republic of China [ROC] and the Republic of China is Taiwan.” That statement set off an exchange of criticism between the pan-blue and pan-green camps.
Some pro-independence activists said Tsai can say whatever she wants and that they will say whatever they want, but what really matters is that when added together, they will win the presidential election.
Others said her statement is a description of the “status quo,” and that it is very different from the ROC of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
Still others are opposed to the national title “ROC,” insisting that it be changed to the “Republic of Taiwan.”
Pro-independence activist Koo Kwang-ming (辜寬敏) even ran newspaper advertisements on Oct. 13 attacking Tsai for legitimizing and legalizing the ROC.
Pro-blue supporters have entered the debate, saying Tsai’s recognition of the ROC was the green camp’s gift to the nation’s centennial celebrations.
The blue camp also said the green camp’s compromise on this important issue could put an end to infighting, that it looks forward to her next step and that her position can relieve the conflict between the pro-unification and pro--independence sides.
Others said the public will have greater expectations of the DPP if it were to include this position in its party platform and push for a “Taiwan consensus” on this basis in an attempt to seek reconciliation with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and various sectors in Taiwanese society.
The truth is that Tsai’s ROC is completely different from Ma’s. In addition, her position does not override the DPP’s 1999 Resolution on Taiwan’s Future.
Actually, it is an extension of former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) 2005 “four-stage theory” of the ROC: the ROC in China; the ROC moving to Taiwan; the ROC in Taiwan; the ROC is Taiwan.
Since Ma came to power more than three years ago, Taiwan’s sovereignty has been jeopardized. In particular, Shanghai Institute of East Asian Studies director Zhang Nianchi (章念馳) published an article in this month’s issue of the Hong Kong-based China Review magazine, saying that the process of unification was started during Ma’s term.
On Oct. 17, Ma responded by proposing a potential “cross-strait peace agreement,” to be signed some time during the next decade.
Under such circumstances, why should the pro-independence camp continue to restrict itself to the national title issue and make statements that are not beneficial to the overall situation?
I believe Tsai and the DPP would never sell out Taiwan, and opinion poll results show that 72 percent of respondents agree that the center-leaning DPP should defeat the pro-China KMT to avoid unification and save Taiwan’s sovereignty from the current crisis.
In future, perhaps a party could be established to push for independence or a change in the national title and to monitor the DPP to see that it accomplishes these ultimate goals.
At the Northern Taiwan Society’s 10th anniversary fundraising party on July 23, Chen said in his written greeting that “independence is not yet completed, all my comrades must struggle on.”
The word “comrades” here refers to all the supporters of independence and a change in the national title.
The fight against unification is currently the most urgent task.
Independence is a future mission that can be completed gradually.
Kuo Chang-feng is a physician.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with