Whether the nation should be called “Taiwan” or go by various other titles has long been a subject of debate.
There is a common misunderstanding within the government and among the public concerning the title “Chinese Taipei,” which is used at international sporting events and other international activities. Some people think it is a fairly non-political term and more of a cultural one, but it has the political sense of possession.
Morocco used to be known as “French Morocco” when it was a French protectorate — or colony — from 1912 to 1955. The “French” in French Morocco was not a cultural adjective, but rather conveyed a sense of possession, so the same must be true of the “Chinese” in “Chinese Taipei.” If Taiwanese realized this, they would probably find the name much harder to accept.
However, there are also some Taiwanese athletes who fear that if the name is changed, they would no longer be allowed to compete. Their main concern is for themselves.
It is not just an issue for athletes, because many Taiwanese come under pressure from China. Nonetheless, we who call for Taiwan to be called by its proper name do so across the board. Our main concern is not whether we have a field to play on or stage to stand on, rather we hope that those who come after us will be free to do whatever they want, instead of being restricted like we are today.
So yes, athletes might feel that they are being sacrificed, but if we do not act now, nothing will change.
If future generations have a field to play on, it would be because of an act of charity by people who look down on us. What glory would there be in that?
Local athletes have made a wise move by putting forward the example of African American athlete Jesse Owens at the 1936 Berlin Olympics in relation to the current campaign launched by Team Taiwan Campaign for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Unfortunately, they only talk about half the example.
Although Owens eventually decided to take part in the Berlin Olympics, before he made that decision, he, in open letters and media interviews, denounced the Nazis’ discrimination of and racism against minorities.
His reason for not withdrawing from the Games might have been that, back then, black people also suffered from severe discrimination in the US. Under segregationist policies, they could only sit in the back of buses and there were separate schools for blacks and whites. Even in the White House there were separate offices and toilets for black and white staff.
US society did not give Owens its wholehearted support. Even after winning four gold medals in Berlin, he was not invited to the White House and received no congratulations from then-US president Franklin D. Roosevelt. Of course, in 1936, the US had not yet had a black president.
In the campaign for Team Taiwan, I have not heard of anyone urge athletes to withdraw from the Games or demand that they pull out. Rather, you might say that it is China that wants “Taiwan” to withdraw.
It is problematic to interpret the issue according to the example of Owens. Two points on which we can learn from Owens are that he clearly objected to the Nazis’ policies and that he was proud of his identity as a black person. That is why people remember not only his heroic performance in track and field events, but also his efforts to promote human rights and justice.
While we hope everyone is proud of their nation, speaking out against injustice is a moral duty that should not be forgotten.
Chang Jui-chuan is a lecturer of English in the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures at National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs