KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) says that the addition of "Taiwan" to the cover of the nation's passport is a serious constitutional issue. KMT Secretary-General Lin Fong-cheng (林豐正) says it reflects a clear tendency toward changing the nation's name and that it will lead to cross-strait instability. People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) is of the opinion that it will harm the national passport, its dignity and character.
Chang Hsien-yao (張顯耀), director of the PFP's Policy Research Center, says that President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) is using the issue to express his political motivation for Taiwan's independence. PFP legislative caucus convener Chou Hsi-wei (周錫瑋) says that indirectly changing the nation's name is illegal and unconstitutional and constitutes grounds for impeachment of the president.
Can the mere addition of the word "Taiwan" to our passports -- to make the bearer's nationality clearer, thus reducing cause for confusion and mistakes, and helping to maintain the pleasure of traveling -- really constitute a change of the nation's name? Is it really a step toward independence? Can it really be said to be unconstitutional? Finally, does it really anger China?
The nation's name is to remain emblazoned on the passport cover in shining, golden letters and yet the opposition seeks to create an uproar by exaggerating the matter, describing it as a change of the nation's name. How can the mere addition of a word to a passport cover constitute a change to a nation's name? To say that the name is being changed "indirectly" is illogical. A nation's name is either changed or it is not changed. How could it possibly be changed "indirectly?"
If Taiwan could gain independence simply by adding the word "Taiwan" to its passports, that would make Taiwan independence a piece of cake for the independence movement, such that it wouldn't even be worthy of the title "movement."
In the mouths of the "pan-blue" alliance, however, anything can mean Taiwan independence. Indeed, if we are to believe all their rhetoric, Taiwan has already achieved independence. If Taiwan has already achieved independence, can it do so again -- a second time, a 10th time?
To say that the move is unconstitutional is also ludicrous. The Passport Act (護照條例) gives the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) authority over passports. So how could MOFA's redesign of the passport implicate the president in unconstitutional behavior?
The opposition is right on one point, though. This will have an impact on cross-strait relations. Over the past few decades, has China ever shown any goodwill toward Taiwan? Has there been anything that hasn't angered China? This matter will certainly have an impact on China's Taiwan Affairs Office (國台辦), which will start issuing rebukes. It wouldn't be the Taiwan Affairs Office if it didn't.
In the course of a debate, it is a wise strategy to remind oneself often of the basic issue under discussion. At the center of this conflict are passports. So, we should ask, what is a passport? A passport is a document that confirms one's identity and nationality when one travels from one country to another. Taiwanese passports are for use in all countries of the world, not just China.
Taiwan should not behave like an abused child, always considering China's mood before daring to make a move. Then people will stop saying that it's best to do nothing.
Taiwan's problems have for a long time been caused by someone else. Why should we be the constant target for Chinese abuse? We should go about our own business in a relaxed and dignified manner. That's the way to behave.
Chen Ro-jinn is a freelance writer.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS