Taiwanese have elected four presidents since the first direct presidential election in 1996: Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) in 1996, Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in 2000 and 2004, Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2008 and 2012 and Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) this year. Apart from Ma, who took a more pro-China approach, all other presidents have understood that Taiwan is a nation.
These directly elected presidents are different from earlier presidents of the Republic of China (ROC), who were elected by the National Assembly (國民大會), which was made up of representatives of China. Politically speaking, it is clear that Taiwan is a new nation that is separate from China.
However, this is not the way things are; the ROC Constitution and the governmental system originate from China, which is governed by the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — which was exiled from China to Taiwan in 1949 and then became the occupying ruler of Taiwan — has used its China ideology to hijack Taiwan’s national identity. Even after direct presidential elections were introduced, this connection has not been severed. The KMT seems unable to solve the issue, but what about other Taiwanese political parties?
The “Republic of China” is the title that powerful Taiwanese use when they talk to the public, but the international community knows the nation as Taiwan. Confusion over the “ROC” and the “PRC” in terms of national identity causes Taiwanese to get lost in a psychopathology of national dignity and nationality identity crisis. It also confuses many entrepreneurs, intellectuals and politicians.
We are clearly Taiwanese, and our nation is clearly known as Taiwan internationally. When we travel to other countries, we are still Taiwanese, but what is the name of our nation? Our own government reluctantly sometimes calls itself the “Republic of China (Taiwan),” but when participating in international events or games, it is called “Chinese Taipei,” with “China” and “Chinese” rigidly tied to “Taipei” — a reduced and belittled Taiwan. Is Taiwan really the same thing as Taipei?
Although Taiwanese can directly elect a president, the China problem has not been resolved. Since 1949, the KMT would rather lose the nation than lose a title. Even worse, in Taiwan, the ideological view that the nation’s name is the “Republic of China” continues to push the nation toward China, and this only serves to support the PRC’s ambition to annex Taiwan. As time passes, this long-standing problem has become a habit and Taiwanese have settled into the “status quo,” creating a deadlock that the nation’s directly elected presidents have been unable to break.
This is the national status: an unclear and vague title, and it is the character of Taiwanese — being unable to say what nation they are citizens of. If Taiwanese cannot resolve this problem, should it be left to other nations to resolve? With an emerging conflict between the US and China, Taiwan also comes in the media spotlight. Is Taiwan voluntarily settling for a humiliating survival in this unclear “status quo”? Perhaps not.
Will we stand up and face our true self?
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers