Premier William Lai (賴清德) last week reiterated his position that the 1981 Lausanne Agreement between the Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) means that Taiwanese athletes are required to use the title “Chinese Taipei” when competing at the Olympics.
It is important that Taiwan’s athletes are able to compete at the Olympics, he said, adding that their rights must be protected.
Lai’s remarks raise two important questions:
First, does this mean that the campaign by an alliance of civic groups for a referendum to rename the national sports team “Taiwan” would affect the ability of Taiwanese athletes to take part at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics?
Second, if the referendum is successful and the government submits a name-change request to the IOC, would this contravene the terms of the Lausanne Agreement?
The answer to both of these questions is no.
Beijing would undoubtedly be driven into paroxysms of fury, but it is important to note that the agreement contains no clause that prevents the government or Taiwanese from freely expressing themselves.
The idea that the IOC would revoke Taiwan’s right to complete if it changed the name of its team does not stand up to scrutiny.
While one can empathize with Lai’s predicament, he and others must understand that China’s bark is worse than its bite. The government has nothing to fear.
As Beijing’s behavior becomes ever more loutish and unreasonable, the world’s attention is drawn with increasing intensity to the absurdity of the name “Chinese Taipei” under which Taiwanese athletes are forced to complete.
Lai also said: “We all support and respect the civic force that is driving” the referendum campaign.
However, at such an important juncture as this, when society is pushing for a referendum to rectify the name, Lai should refrain from making any comments that might confuse the public and hurt the campaign.
Furthermore, Lai also said: “When the majority of Taiwanese refer to their country, for instance at certain academic events, they use the name ‘Republic of China’ [ROC]. However, most people generally refer to their country simply as ‘Taiwan.’”
“While both [names] represent our nation, ‘Republic of China’ is used only when specifically required,” he said.
The point is that the name “Chinese Taipei” does not represent Taiwan or the ROC. “Chinese Taipei” certainly does not denote “ROC Taipei.” If it did contain so much as a whiff of this meaning, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) would certainly not have tolerated its use.
Besides, the international community believes that there is only “one China” and that this means the PRC.
As such, when Taiwan calls itself “Chinese Taipei” at the Olympics, it is easy for people from other nations to mistakenly assume that Taiwanese athletes are PRC athletes. This is obviously extremely detrimental to the nation’s interests.
While it is extremely important that Taiwan’s athletes have the chance to complete at the Olympics, it is equally important — a matter of urgency even — that the international community understands the reality that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation.
For this reason, the public must get behind the referendum campaign so that Taiwan can spread the truth to the world.
Hideki Nagayama is chairman of the Taiwan Research Forum.
Translated by Edward Jones
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
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
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