Some readers might find this article too idealistic, but it is time to infuse some idealism into Taiwanese society.
People might change their names to please others in exchange for benefit and profit, but this is not a decent thing to do. However, this is precisely what our government has been doing in response to pressure from China.
The Republic of China (ROC) was not allowed to join the WTO, so it changed its name to the “Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu” to become a WTO member.
Nor is the ROC allowed to participate in international sports events, so it changed its name to “Chinese Taipei” to make participation possible.
There are several reasons for the nation doing so: to obtain some benefit, to improve Taiwan’s “visibility” and to avoid being “isolated” in the international community.
However, these arguments can be refuted by anyone who advocates using “Taiwan” as the nation’s name.
First, when it comes to international organizations that do not accept the name “Taiwan,” Taiwanese should boycott them and not participate in them for the sake of the nation’s dignity. Some benefits should be sacrificed.
Second, so-called “visibility” is not worth pursuing at the cost of the nation’s dignity.
Taiwanese should model themselves after Nordic countries — they do not host that many big international sports events, fairs and so on, yet they are highly visible in the world, because they have sound democracies, freedom and human rights, comprehensive welfare systems, narrow wealth gaps and international humanitarian policies.
When France was defeated in the Franco-Prussian War, the peace treaty was extremely harsh to France — in addition to having to cede territory to Prussia, it also had to pay a war indemnity of 5 billion francs, an astronomical figure.
It was widely expected that France would be crushed by this huge debt and never be able to regain its feet.
However, to the world’s astonishment, the French took it as such a humiliation and blow to their reputation that they worked hard to increase production and made generous monetary contributions to quickly pay off the indemnity.
This tells us that a nation’s wounded pride can spark miraculous results, which once again highlights the importance of a nation’s dignity. Perhaps this is something that Taiwanese can learn from.
Third, if international organizations do not accept the nation’s participation under the name “Taiwan,” then Taiwanese should boycott them and reject participation. If this results in the nation’s isolation, it would be a matter of “honorable isolation,” and Taiwanese should accept it fearlessly so that their descendants can proudly cherish a legacy of forebears who bravely and heroically accepted international isolation at a heavy cost to maintain their dignity.
Perhaps doing so could become another milestone in the history of the world.
The only choice that Taiwanese have is to walk down one of these two paths: to reject the nation’s name and swallow the humiliation of being manipulated by others — for the sake of maintaining a few benefits — or to bravely accept an “honorable isolation” and to pay the painful price for it — for the sake of maintaining the nation’s dignity.
Those who advocate changing the nation’s name to “Taiwan” should help other Taiwanese understand that the dignity of the citizenry is more important than anything else — once Taiwanese lose their dignity, the nation will decline.
Peng Ming-min was a senior adviser to former president Chen Shui-bian.
Translated by Lin Lee-Kai
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this