During the 13 years I spent in the US working in international diplomacy, I met numerous members from US think tanks, not one of whom approved of the idea of Taiwan following the legal independence route. They felt it would be detrimental to cross-strait peace and security, and would not be in the US’ interest.
Advocates of a referendum to change Taiwan’s name need to look very carefully at whether, even if such a referendum were to be successful, countries such as the US would recognize “Taiwan” as this nation’s official title, whether China would respond fiercely and whether it would not severely harm US-Taiwan relations.
Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) recognized the impossibility of such a move. It is a political reality Taiwanese simply have to accept.
If Taiwan wants to change its name and become independent, it needs international recognition — otherwise the project is meaningless.
However, seen within the context of the international community upholding the “one China” policy, no country on Earth is going to recognize Taiwan simply because it has sloughed off the pretense of representing China.
Many countries have huge political and economic interest in China, and would not risk China cutting diplomatic ties with them, as it would seriously effect them.
Whenever embarking on any public endeavor, it is vital to evaluate its feasibility and any likely negative effects. This is especially true with an independence referendum, which would affect the future of the 23 million people living in Taiwan.
Taipei cannot proceed rashly without being mindful of the international situation.
If Taiwan wants to obtain legal independence, Taiwanese need to consider the international context and look for a situation that would benefit their case without harming others’ interests.
Taiwanese should aim to have allies amend their definition of the “one China” policy and, when the time is right, change “Taiwan is part of China” to “we acknowledge that the government of the People’s Republic of China is the only legal representative of China, but Taiwan does not belong to China.”
It would then be possible for countries to recognize Taiwan.
US President Donald Trump last month signed the Taiwan Travel Act. He also hired John Bolton as his national security adviser and nominated CIA Director Mike Pompeo as US secretary of state — both of whom are fiercely anti-China and pro-Taiwan — as a way to elevate US-Taiwan relations with a view to containing China.
This is part of the US’ changing approach to the “one China” policy to protect the US’ interests in the Asia-Pacific region, because of the damage to peace and security in the Taiwan Strait and the Western Pacific caused by China’s bellicosity.
Nevertheless, it remains unlikely that the US government would amend its “one China” policy or recognize Taiwan any time soon.
Instead, Taipei should look for ways to take advantage of the international situation and use the Taiwan Travel Act as much as it can, encouraging the US to use the legislation and thereby further US-Taiwan relations.
This would help create an environment conducive to the US revisiting the “one China” policy and when the time is right, Taipei could ask the US to amend its policy on the maintenance of the “status quo” and recognize Taiwan.
If Taiwan could re-establish diplomatic relations with the US, other countries should follow and the international community would recognize Taiwan.
This would not be easy. It would take strategy, planning and patience.
Michael Lin is a retired diplomat who served in the US.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US