Taiwan not a part of ROC
If the upper beam is not straight, the bottom beam must be twisted.
The Press Division of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO) in Washington again caused great confusion with its letter posted on Jan. 20. It said: “According to Taiwan’s Constitution, it is a part of the ROC [Republic of China].” (Letters, Jan. 20, page 8)
First, there is no “Taiwan Constitution.”
Second, the Control Yuan just recently chastised the Executive Yuan over its referral to the ROC as Taiwan, which means there is no Taiwan constitution, but a constitution of the ROC.
Third, the US’ Taiwan Relations Act, Section 15, Article 2 says: “Taiwan includes ... the governing authorities on Taiwan recognized by the United States as the Republic of China prior to January 1, 1979.” That means the ROC is included in Taiwan, not that Taiwan is part of the ROC.
The key argument in a letter dated Jan. 9 (Letter, Jan. 9, page 8) was that while Representative to the US King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) answered: “It’s the first time I have heard of this” to Legislator Mark Chen’s (陳唐山) statement that the US does not recognize Taiwan as part of China at all, the US State Department’s demarche: “The United States will be obliged to disassociate itself on a national basis from such a position” in response to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s official letter stating that: “The United Nations considers Taiwan for all purposes to be an integral part of the People’s Republic of China [PRC]” was a crystal-clear US policy on Taiwan.
Yes, TECRO’s letter mentioned the importance of the Taiwan Relations Act and the “six assurances”: The US would not alter its position over Taiwan’s sovereignty and it would not formally recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan. They emphasized and confirmed the US has never altered its policy, which means they agree that since the end of World War II, the long-standing US policy on Taiwan has been consistent: “There is only one China. Taiwan is not independent. It does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation and that remains our policy, our firm policy.”
However, TECRO’s open letter associated with King’s statement to a legislator that he has never heard of the interpretation of the US’ “‘one China policy’ — that Washington does not recognize Taiwan as part of China” — was puzzling and worrying. They said and wrote something improperly and inconsistently and then accused the media and readers of taking the statements out of context and misinterpreting them, which is unfortunate and distracts from the pursuit of Taiwan’s important policy objectives.
That Taiwan does not belong to the PRC is the nation’s most important policy. However, TECRO’s letter is inspiration to create a Taiwan constitution. TECRO, as the official representative of Taiwan in Washington, should read carefully the Taiwan Relations Act, which states that Taiwan includes the ROC, but is not a part of it.
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry