Double Ten National Day should be celebrated by the entire nation, but, due to discord between the pan-blue and pan-green camps, and the ongoing tension between unification and independence supporters, the annual celebrations are typically overshadowed by debates about the nation’s political future.
President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration this year chose an unconventional stage design for the celebrations — one that features no red “double ten” symbols and no national flags — drawing ire from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
In Taipei, people often see three types of flags: The Republic of China (ROC) national flag championed by the KMT; the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) flag which is a symbol of Taiwan; and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) national flag, usually held by members of the China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) during their demonstrations.
The different flags say something about Taiwan’s political diversity. While the DPP has been elected the ruling party through the ROC political system — and Tsai is without question the president — it does not mean that the ROC flag must appear at National Day celebrations.
Although the decorated archway along Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei says “ROC,” the venue design for the celebrations was panned by the KMT and CUPP for its lack of national flags.
Compared with past National Day celebrations, tension between the pan-blue and pan-green camps has increased this year, in part due to the controversy regarding the recent “Sing! China: Shanghai-Taipei Music Festival.”
Many people would also remember how the Taipei Summer Universiade in August was overshadowed by several incidents involving flags. That Taiwanese cannot bring their national flag to the Games hosted by their own nation was extremely frustrating.
This is why many supporters of Taiwanese independence brought their green flags to the Games. They did so to express their political beliefs and by a way of protest.
The reason the ROC has been unable to gain recognition from the international community is because of the KMT’s “one China” principle. The party’s concessions to Beijing have led the nation to its current plight.
Although the party has repeatedly claimed that the ROC is a sovereign political entity, it never held its ground when confronted by Beijing. By acknowledging the so-called “1992 consensus” it has lowered Taiwan’s national status.
History has shown that Taiwan cannot outsmart Beijing by following its “one China” principle. The KMT has tried to justify its support of the “1992 consensus” by explaining it as an agreement by both sides of the Taiwan Strait that each has its own interpretation of what “China” means, but that is just a lie that the KMT wishes were true. The discourse has proven to be completely useless in helping improve Taiwan’s national status.
The KMT never dared mention the nation’s name when meeting Chinese leaders in Beijing, and when former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) met with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore, he was also too scared to mention the ROC.
It makes no sense that the KMT should demand that the DPP wave ROC national flags when it would not even say the nation’s name without fear or hesitation.
Premier William Lai (賴清德) sparked controversy last month when he made it clear during a Legislative Yuan meeting that he hoped for an independent Taiwan, but his statement was an honest account of the nation’s political reality.
Any discourse about China will be eventually be used by Beijing against Taiwan. If the DPP wants to break free from the latter’s influence, it must find an alternative to the KMT’s “one China” principle, which is designed to entrap Taiwan.
Equivocation is never tolerated in politics. The ROC has been excluded from the international community and its success limited to the domestic market.
Many might wonder how the KMT felt about people waving PRC flags on the streets of Taipei; or what the retired military officers were thinking, having traveled all the way to Beijing to listen to Xi’s didactic speech.
However, even more puzzling is former vice president and KMT chairman Lian Chan’s (連戰) decision to attend a military parade in Beijing.
Although the tanks and missiles displayed at the parade were meant to be used against Taiwan, Lien not only felt honored to attend the inspection, but also seemed elated. He must have been insane to the point where he could not even tell the date.
From Lai’s statement that he believes in independence to the PRC flags waved by CUPP members and the KMT’s insistence on the “1992 consensus,” it is clear that we live in a time of change, when a definitive answer is yet to be found.
Simply talking about “one China” and the importance of waving the national flag means nothing if people do not care about what makes a nation — namely democracy, human rights, justice and other values.
Although Taiwanese society remains divided, the public’s vision of what Taiwan can be will not be conditioned by the national flag or the nation’s name. While political chaos is expected to continue for a while, we can only trust that our democracy will eventually help us find the answer we need.
Chen Fang-ming is a professor at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Taiwanese Literature.
Translated by Tu Yu-an
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS