Few would deny that former minister of foreign affairs Mark Chen (陳唐山) is a member of the pro-Taiwanese independence old guard.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) would certainly agree that he is — which is why it has blacklisted him — as would independence advocates living in the US, the US government and the US Congress, which he addressed as a representative of World United Formosans for Independence.
THE ‘STATUS QUO’
It was for this reason that members of the new wave of independence advocates raised their eyebrows when Chen told US media that maintaining the cross-strait “status quo” is a way to protect the nation and that mentioning independence is a step too far.
The new wave of independence supporters believe that President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) policy of maintaining the cross-strait “status quo” was the reason for her drubbing in the recent local elections.
However, one Washington Post columnist visiting Taiwan said that everywhere he went, it seemed that everybody he met supported the “status quo,” just as Chen had.
NAMES ARE NOT ENOUGH
It goes without saying that it is entirely legitimate and reasonable to dispose of an imposed national title — if there were not a high price to pay for doing so.
However, it would be misguided to presume that simply changing the name of a country would gain that country official recognition.
The reason that Taiwan’s independent status has failed to secure it recognition as a country is purely political in nature: It has little to do with the name itself.
For 30 years, the US refused to recognize the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that had established itself in China, continuing to recognize instead the exiled government of the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, while not recognizing that the latter’s territory extended to China.
The name of the country was not a factor in deciding whether to recognize the legitimacy of a government.
However, the continuation of the “status quo” could become an important consideration of whether or not to recognize a country.
When the US abandoned the ROC in favor of establishing diplomatic relations with the PRC, then-US president Jimmy Carter expected the KMT to surrender within three or four years — perhaps seven or eight years at the most. With that, the “Taiwan problem” would have been resolved.
Over the four decades that have passed since then, the exiled ROC government has been transformed into a representative, legitimate constitutional government and, over the past 20 years, calls for the US to recognize Taiwan’s status have gradually become louder.
RECOGNITION
That Taiwan’s status remains unrecognized is not the fault of Taiwan: It is because the US and the international community have capitulated to China.
With the long-term maintenance of the “status quo,” coupled with China’s refusal to act in accordance with international norms and its hegemonic ambitions, the time is now ripe for the US to re-examine when would be the appropriate time to recognize Taiwan’s national status.
For 40 years now, the US has failed to officially recognize a political entity that legally belongs to no other country and which has consistently maintained an independent existence. That, my friends, is a step too far.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Chinese actor Alan Yu (于朦朧) died after allegedly falling from a building in Beijing on Sept. 11. The actor’s mysterious death was tightly censored on Chinese social media, with discussions and doubts about the incident quickly erased. Even Hong Kong artist Daniel Chan’s (陳曉東) post questioning the truth about the case was automatically deleted, sparking concern among overseas Chinese-speaking communities about the dark culture and severe censorship in China’s entertainment industry. Yu had been under house arrest for days, and forced to drink with the rich and powerful before he died, reports said. He lost his life in this vicious
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
In South Korea, the medical cosmetic industry is fiercely competitive and prices are low, attracting beauty enthusiasts from Taiwan. However, basic medical risks are often overlooked. While sharing a meal with friends recently, I heard one mention that his daughter would be going to South Korea for a cosmetic skincare procedure. I felt a twinge of unease at the time, but seeing as it was just a casual conversation among friends, I simply reminded him to prioritize safety. I never thought that, not long after, I would actually encounter a patient in my clinic with a similar situation. She had
RSS