Taiwan by any other name
In the wake of President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) telephone call with US president-elect Donald Trump, there has been some discussion in the media about the names of the nation.
The stakes are high, and the potential effect the choice of a name could have might be enormous for the nation and its people’s desire to form an identity.
I would like to point out some egregious shortcomings of the existing inconsistency of the names used in the international arena and recommend a well-coordinated and thoughtfully orchestrated action from the government.
A few “compromised” and perhaps “self-censored” names for the nation have been adopted as representative. These include Chinese Taipei, Republic of China on Taiwan, and the Taipei Cultural and Economic Office in locations worldwide.
First of all, the obvious problem is their inconsistency and confusion. The words, China and Chinese, have been traditionally associated with the country across the Taiwan Strait, at least for those people living in North America and Europe.
The ownership of the two English words “China” and “Chinese” no longer belongs to Taiwan. From the nation’s “branding” and “soft power” perspectives, the continued usage of these words in Taiwan’s international involvement and non-governmental events actually accentuates the awareness and benefit of China at the expense of Taiwan.
For example, it would take too much of an effort for any average American to identify China Airlines as Taiwan’s national airline. Furthermore, the use of Taipei in the overseas offices sounds like a misnomer, which ignores the rest of the nation.
The best-case scenario for the usage of a consistent, representative, name is certainly through the formal, legal route.
Yet, to change the Constitution would be labor-intensive and time-consuming and could be deemed internationally provocative.
However, the eventual change could be tremendously beneficial and have a long-term effect in the domestic and international arenas.
The next best thing that the government can do is adopt a policy to use a name — with which most citizens agree — to represent the nation consistently and systematically, domestically and internationally. Given the dire straits Taiwan has been in, the president and the government cannot passively wait for the situation to improve, but identify an advantageous position and install a sweeping policy to right the wrongs that have been irresponsibly and thoughtlessly practiced for decades.
Taiwan may need to learn from its neighbors, such as Japan and South Korea, to develop an identifiable, national image or culture repertoire and market the nation around the world.
In a time of public diplomacy and soft power, it is imperative for the government to get out of its diplomatic box and become more creative and strategic in elevating the nation’s presence and winning over the hearts and minds of key allies.
Denis Wu
Boston
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath