A new debate on the national flag is taking place in Taiwan. The battle lines are predictable: the KMT and James Soong's (宋楚瑜) PFP are clinging to the old flag, brought over from China in 1945, while the TSU and significant parts of the DPP are in favor of a new flag that represents the new, democratic Taiwan.
It is good to take a step back and see how this issue is perceived by the international community, particularly the US and Europe. Overseas observers, governments and parliaments see Taiwan in a positive light because of its recent democratization, but the US and Europe can't bring themselves to normalize relations with Taiwan because of pressure from China.
This pressure is deep-rooted, primarily in the civil war fought from the 1920s through 1949 between the Chinese Communists and the KMT of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石). To the Chinese, the KMT and the ROC flag became symbols of that decades-long conflict.
Taiwan went through its democratic transformation in the 1980s and 1990s, which culminated in the election of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in March 2000. However, the new government took on the shell of the old system, including its symbols, such as the 1947 Constitution, the 1911 "made in China" flag and the equally outdated anthem -- a 1928 KMT song.
It is clear that those symbols have little to do with present-day Taiwan -- they are left-over attributes of the KMT's days in China. While it is perhaps understandable that the KMT old guard wants to cling to them out of a fast-disappearing sense of security, it would be wise for Taiwan to move to a new set of symbols.
The reasons are as follows: As long as Taiwan clings to symbols that are associated with the old civil war, it is a reminder that this civil war is not quite finished. For closure, it is necessary that these symbols are buried. An even more important reason is to find a new flag, anthem and Constitution that truly represent the new Taiwan. This process may take a few years, but it is an essential part of becoming a "new" nation. In the case of the US, it took 11 years -- from the 1776 Declaration of Independence to the 1787 Constitutional Convention. The US national anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner, wasn't written until 1814.
The old symbols represent only the KMT. Present-day Taiwan is made up of Aborigines, the Hakka- and Hokkien-speaking population, as well as the mainlanders who came over after 1945.
For Taiwan to survive, they all need to identify with the new Taiwan and evolve into a new identity that is truly Taiwanese in nature.
From the international perspective, it is also necessary to develop a new Taiwanese identity.
As long as Taiwan continues to present itself as the ROC, the international community will be forced -- by the "one China" dictum -- to maintain the line that only informal, economic and cultural ties are possible.
Only when Taiwan states clearly and unequivocally that it distances itself from the ROC identity, and presents itself as a new and democratic nation, will it be able to open the doors toward full recognition and diplomatic relations.
A fair and open debate about the national flag and anthem would be a good start.
Gerrit van der Wees and Mei-chin Chen are editors of Taiwan Communique, an international publication dedicated to democracy in Taiwan and full and equal membership of Taiwan in the international community.
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS