Tue, Oct 22, 2019 page8

• National title not the issue for Taiwan

  • By Ou Wei-chun 歐瑋群
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  In her Double Ten National Day address, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that the words “Republic of China (Taiwan)” enjoy a consensus in Taiwanese society.

  Although this title expresses the common life experience of Taiwanese, by juxtaposing the government’s official title and the nation’s subjective reality, it has given rise to further discussion and a variety of opinions.

  For decades there has been a never-ending discussion about the relationship between the Republic of China (ROC) and Taiwan. From the “ROC’s arrival on Taiwan” to the “ROC on Taiwan” to today’s “ROC (Taiwan), these names demonstrate the changes in the nation’s positioning over several decades, during which the nation’s subjective reality has moved from China to Taiwan.

  The use of a title that connects the ROC with Taiwan is not Tsai’s invention.

  In a declassified telegram dated Nov. 30, 1971, from the US embassy in Taipei to the US Department of State, then-ambassador Walter McConaughy recounted a conversation he had with then-vice minister of foreign affairs Yang Hsi-kun (楊西崑).

  CHINESE REPUBLIC?

  Yang told McConaughy how, shortly after the ROC’s Oct. 25, 1971, withdrawal from the UN, he had suggested to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) that the nation’s title should be changed to the “Chinese Republic of Taiwan.”

  Apparently, Yang wanted to inform the US government about this suggestion to gain its support.

  Imagine what would have happened if Washington had taken this suggestion seriously and the central administration had promoted it. Would we still be arguing about whether the ROC and Taiwan are one and the same?

  Yang took his inspiration for this idea from the Arab world. In the past, there have been the United Arab Republic, the United Arab States and the Yemen Arab Republic. Among existing states, there are the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

  Taiwanese may be surprised to learn that the official title of Egypt, the land of the pharaohs, is the Arab Republic of Egypt, while that of war-torn Syria is the Syrian Arab Republic. Could the existence of so many “Arab” nations cause confusion in the international community?

  CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

  As Yang suggested, it is all a matter of culture. Historically, Cairo was the capital of the Fatimid Caliphate, while the Umayyad Caliphate had its capital at Damascus.

  Both caliphates were successors to the Rashidun Caliphate, otherwise known as the Arab Empire. Thus, when Egypt and Syria call themselves “Arab,” they are merely highlighting their historical and cultural origins.

  It does not necessarily overshadow their geographic identities as Egypt and Syria. That being so, how could the international community, especially Western countries, be confused? Who could possibly think that Egypt and Syria are inseparable parts of Saudi Arabia?

  The breakup of the Ottoman Empire, followed by World War II, sowed the seeds of various wars in the Middle East. Similarly, the Pacific War and the ensuing Cold War left in their wake the thorny question of Taiwan.

  These disputes cannot be resolved through arguments about names and realities. The main point is whether the defeat of international forces can lead to a balance.

  Names and titles have never been the crux of the Middle East’s problems, so why would they be with respect to Taiwan?

  Ou Wei-chun is the chief legal officer of a private company.

  Translated by Julian Clegg
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Japan deploys long-range missiles close to China

  • 2

    New streamlined Taiwan Pass to go on sale today

  • 3

    Nexperia’s China unit nears fully local production of chips: company sources

  • 4

    China reserves offshore airspace for 40 days without explanation: WSJ

  • 5

    Seoul to revise disputed e-arrival card, report says