The opposition parties have repeatedly requested President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and government officials accept the principle of "one China, with each side free to make its own interpretation" (一個中國、各自表述) and admit that "I'm Taiwanese and I'm also Chinese" (我是台灣人、也是中國人). They have criticized the government, saying that the ruling party's pro-independence ideology is blocking the road to peace in the Taiwan Strait. Chen and his party have failed to defend their cross-strait policies, dividing the country further as each day goes by.
Both issues revolve around the question: who is the true representative of China? If the ROC is, it seems natural for us to accept the "one China" principle and to admit that we are all Chinese. On the other hand, if the PRC is the legal representative, we will hurt our national dignity by supporting the "one China" principle. Aren't Taiwan's president and premier becoming PRC citizens if they admit that they are Chinese?
Since the PRC has been recognized worldwide as the legal representative of China, demanding Taiwanese people to accept the "one China" principle and to admit that we are Chinese is, in former president Lee Teng-hui's
I believe the opposition parties are also aware of the risks of accepting the "one China" principle. When the KMT was still in power, then-chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC,
So the "one China" and "I am Chinese" issues involve Taiwan's national dignity as well as its diplomatic and cross-strait relations. Taiwan will not accept the "one China" principle unless the PRC respects the existence of Taiwan and stops trying to decrease Taiwan's international presence while constantly threatening it with military force.
Taiwan must be careful about the political trap posed by the "one China" principle. To stabilize and to further develop cross-strait relations, however, the DPP government should consider the principle of "one China with each side free to make its own interpretation."
Meanwhile, I would urge Chen not to follow the KMT's 1992 interpretation of the "one China" principle. His interpretation should be based on his own inaugural speech, which suggested that the leaders on both sides should jointly deal with the question of a "future one China"
The two sides might negotiate on all these issues. The National Unification Council
Tung Chen-yuan is a doctoral candidate at the School of Advanced International Studies, John Hopkins University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
RSS