"Where are you from?" This is a typical opening line for the people of Taiwan. This warm up line toward new friends is also an important indicator of the cultural difference between the East and West. Americans and Europeans are unfamiliar with the concept of kinship based on proximity.
It is pathetic that nowadays the line seems to carry some very complicated implications. "Are you Taiwanese or Chinese?" The question has turned into a political plague that is spreading rapidly and causing a high mortality rate.
Ever since Chen clarified that his statement "I am Chinese" means "ethnic Chinese," the line has become very popular in political circles. New Party leader Hau Lung-pin (郝龍斌) has, as a result, alleged the DPP and Chen of being obsessed with ideologies.
Actually, many tricks and gimmicks that the opposition parties are using to in performance of their duty to monitor the government originated from the DPP. In the past, the DPP tended to go after officials from China. If the official had a low degree of identification with Taiwan, making it difficult for him to proclaim "I am Taiwanese," the DPP legislators would condemn him for failing to identify with Taiwan, and not loving Taiwan, while having grew up on Taiwan water and rice. It was as if the official was guilty of some unforgivable sin.
This line of questioning resembles the type of questions quarreling lovers tend to ask each other. "Do you love me? "Do you care about me at all?" "Do I mean anything to you?" One lover would ask his or her mate. Both sides know too well that no answer in the world can ease the skepticism felt by the side asking the question, but they persist. Unless the sense of skepticism is removed first, no answer, be it in the affirmative or negative, can please the person. In any event, the question will be raised again periodically, leading to more fights and anger.
Just like between husband and wife, perhaps we should learn to directly skip over the page with the question "do you love me?" written on it, and refuse to answer the question when asked. Repeatedly asking officials "who are you?" does not help resolve anything. The attitude underlying the question and the substance of the question simply intensify animosity, especially when the two sides are low on mutual trust.
Over the years, people should have come to realize that when Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) declared that he was Taiwanese, he intended to pacify the opposition faction and forces. The issues of independence, unification, and future direction of our country were not on his mind at the time. Between the high ranking officials of Taiwan and China, the tug-a-war over self-identification as either "Taiwanese" or "Chinese" is meaningless to the resolution of the cross-strait standoff. The only thing gained is anger and more grounds for more arguments.
If being wise is insufficient to convince the other side to take your side, then one should move on and not dwell on the question any more. Once all other problems are resolved, one's nationality just might become irrelevant.
Chen Ro-jinn is a freelance writer.
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