Justifying change
The Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) telegram to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on the opening of the latter’s 19th National Congress stated the year as Oct. 17, 106 (2017).
KMT spokesperson Hung Meng-kai (洪孟楷) said: “This is the spirit of ‘one China, different interpretations.’ This is how past KMT chairmen have handled their congratulatory telegrams and the CCP has responded using the Western chronology. It is a matter of mutual understanding. It is also an expression of the spirit of the [so-called] ‘1992 consensus’ and ‘one China, different interpretations,’ and that the two sides are looking for an opening for dialogue based on their positions.”
He also said: “Chronology is secondary, the most important thing is that the CCP and the KMT can engage in cross-strait dialogue and substantive exchanges. A willingness to engage in dialogue is helpful to peaceful cross-strait development. By comparison, after one year and five months in power, [President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文)] administration is unwilling to accept the ‘1992 consensus,’ which has resulted in a freezing of cross-strait relations and even a dangerous move toward opposition, and the Taiwanese public finds this to be both worrying and difficult to accept.”
To resolve the divergence between the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), make a show of goodwill toward China and connect with the international community, Taiwan has two choices when it comes to the official chronology.
The KMT could introduce a bill stipulating that government institutions change the “Republic of China” to “China.” In that case the KMT could have written “China, Oct. 17, 2017” in its telegram to the CCP.
This would probably upset Beijing, though, because it would probably want it to say “China, Oct. 17, 4602” given its long history.
The second option would be for the DPP and the New Power Party to initiate a bill to bring Taiwan in line with the international community by introducing the Western chronology.
Then the KMT and other people sympathizing with the CPP would be able to write “Oct. 17, 2017” which would perhaps be more acceptable for the CCP.
Finally, we could then use the KMT’s own statement given above to justify this change to Taiwanese: “Chronology is secondary, the most important thing is that the CCP and the KMT can engage in cross-strait dialogue and substantive exchanges.”
Lai Yu-che
Hualien County
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under