Only two days before a proposal is made in the UN General Assembly for the nation's entry into that organization, very little grassroots support of the bid has been in evidence. In the past, campaigns supporting the UN bid have been labeled activities of over-zealous Taiwanese independence fundamentalists, which may partially explain this year's lukewarm response. However, this perception could not be more mistaken.
Regardless of whether one supports or opposes future unification with China, no self-respecting citizen of this country can deny the sovereignty Taiwan currently enjoys. It is also a plain fact that the 23 million people residing on this island are entirely unrepresented at the UN. Even pro-unificationists cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that the People's Republic of China (PRC) does not and has not ever governed Taiwan. For that reason alone the PRC is completely inadequate and incapable of representing the people of Taiwan at the UN.
No sane person in Taiwan, be they supporters of unification or of independence, can possibly trust China to represent their interests. The PRC's hostility toward Taiwan and, on a more personal level, everyone on this island is all too amply demonstrated by the large number of missiles targeting Taiwan and recent Chinese moves to drive foreign investors away at a time when the Taiwanese economy is rapidly deteriorating.
So unless the government of Taiwan successfully opens the UN door, the people of Taiwan will continue to be underrepresented within the international community.
That is something everyone on this island should find offensive, when virtually every other country in the world has a voice at the UN.
The pro-unification media have had virtually no coverage of this year's UN bid. This comes as little surprise. But what about all those so-called patriotic politicians and lawmakers? Why have they all been silent? The only interpretation possible for such a lack of interest is their total disregard for the dignity and interests of the nation's people.
Taiwan's government has made a number of pragmatic changes to this year's UN bid. The most noteworthy breakthrough perhaps is dropping long outdated and suicidal rhetoric that the future of the two sides across the Taiwan Strait be jointly decided by "the people on the two sides." Why people on the other side of the Taiwan Strait should be invited to decide the future of people here defies logic and common sense.
Another breakthrough is the use of the name "Taiwan" to cross-reference the "Republic of China." It makes sense for our nation to enter the UN under the name "Taiwan" for the same reason that China has always maintained its UN membership under the name "China." As the PRC is the only government representing the member "China," the ROC would be the only government representing the member "Taiwan." As UN membership belongs to countries rather than the governments representing those countries, why would Taiwan enter the UN under the name "ROC" in the first place?
Again, using the name "Taiwan" should be merely a matter of common sense, irrespective of one's stance on unification. After all, under what other name could this country enter the UN? The name "China" is simply out of the question. Not only is that name already taken, but it would also be inconsistent with reality.
Only when the people of Taiwan put aside their differences and focus on UN entry can this country have a real chance of gaining admission.
As it has striven toward superiority in most measures of the Asian military balance, China is now ready to challenge the undersea balance of power, long dominated by the United States, a decisive advantage crucial to its ability to deter blockade and invasion of Taiwan by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). America expended enormous treasure to develop the technology, logistics, training, and personnel to emerge victorious in the Cold War undersea struggle against the former Soviet Union, and to remain superior today; the US is not used to considering the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)
The annual summit of East Asia and other events around the ASEAN summit in October and November every year have become the most important gathering of leaders in the Indo-Pacific region. This year, as Laos is the chair of ASEAN, it was privileged to host all of the ministerial and summit meetings associated with ASEAN. Besides the main summit, this included the high-profile East Asia Summit, ASEAN summits with its dialogue partners and the ASEAN Plus Three Summit with China, Japan and South Korea. The events and what happens around them have changed over the past 15 years from a US-supported, ASEAN-led
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —
President William Lai’s (賴清德) first Double Ten National Day address had two strategic goals. For domestic affairs, the speech aimed to foster consensus on national identity, strengthen the country and unite the Taiwanese against a Chinese invasion. In terms of cross-strait relations, the speech aimed to mitigate tensions in the Taiwan Strait and promote the coexistence and prosperity of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in China and the Republic of China (ROC). Lai is taking a different stance from previous Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administrations on domestic political issues. During his speech, he said: “The PRC could not be the
RSS