As a result of indifference from members of the hypocritical international community that do not have the guts to stand up to China’s despotism, Taiwan was again subjected to absurd treatment at an international event.
The ridiculousness was highlighted last week when Chinese Taipei Football Association secretary-general Chen Wei-jen (陳威任) said that the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) had fined Taiwan’s national soccer body US$5,000 after spectators displayed a flag promoting Taiwanese independence at a game in Kaohsiung on June 2.
According to Chen, the AFC said the display was “a breach of regulations against the exhibition of political flags and slogans at international matches.”
Unbelievable.
It is sad enough that Taiwanese athletes, unlike their counterparts from other nations, cannot compete with pride and honor for Taiwan, but must participate under the meaningless name “Chinese Taipei.” It is even more frustrating for the national soccer body to be fined by the AFC over a fan’s actions, a move that oppresses freedom of expression.
The AFC said the display of the flag was “an exhibition of political flags and slogans,” yet the name Taiwan’s teams compete under is itself political, a demeaning and geographically incorrect title that is a result of China’s bullying and sneaky attempts to shape a global impression that downgrades Taiwan’s sovereignty through the use of such a title.
If the AFC does not regard “Chinese Taipei” as political language, on what basis does it decide that a fan’s self-expression is an attempt to mix sports with politics?
Granted, it might be a necessary concession to refer to Taiwan as “Chinese Taipei” in international sport, in line with the protocol that the government signed with the International Olympic Committee. However, it does not mean that spectators must quietly accept this continuing injustice against Taiwan.
It was equally disappointing to hear Premier Lin Chuan (林全) say last week: “Chinese Taipei is the Republic of China.”
Lin should be reminded that just because the official delegation from Taiwan has to march under the absurd “Chinese Taipei” banner, it does not mean that the 23 million people in Taiwan want to be called “Chinese Taipei-ers.”
A poll released by the Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation late last month suggested that the percentage of people who regard themselves as “Taiwanese” has reached a record high of more than 80 percent, compared with 8.1 percent of respondents who consider themselves “Chinese” and 7.6 percent who identify as being both.
Most media outlets from other nations are willing to refer to Taiwan as Taiwan.
Self-respect gains respect. Taiwanese officials must not let themselves grow numb to such incorrectness and accept such injustice.
If Taiwanese do not demand a correction to the misunderstanding regarding their nationality, how can they expect members of the international community, global organizations and others to realize when they commit a mistake?
The government and the public alike must not remain silent when Taiwan’s sovereign status is questioned or its national image is undermined through inadequate references, otherwise Taiwan will never escape the shackles of being regarded as a province of China. If Taiwanese do not stand up for themselves, it will be only matter of time before the name Taiwan is permanently removed from world maps and replaced with the ridiculous “Chinese Taipei” appellation.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS