Some modest proposals
Recently, I saw several articles published in the editorial section of the Taipei Times regarding how Taiwan is being harassed by China in the international theater.
These harassments consist of everything from the name of Taiwan, China's crackdown on "pro-green" Taiwanese business people and entertainers ("Opening to the Enemy," June 30, page 8) and the repeated campaign against Taiwan's membership in UN ("Long view needed in economic diplomacy," Aug. 28, page 8).
On all of the above issues, may I present my view, to see if the Taiwan government can take quick action in developing a new strategy and implementing it as early as possible for the benefit of the Taiwanese people and their future freedom and happiness.
Perhaps, you might like to forward this letter to President Chen Shui-bian (
Taiwan's name: Recently, we were watching the opening ceremony of the Olympics and saw the Taiwan called "Chinese Taipei." One of the US viewers asked, "Where is the country `Chinese Taipei? Is it in China?'"
From time to time, we also read articles in newspapers and magazines and are very confused about the distinction between the Taiwan-owned China Airlines, China Petroleum, China Steel, China Shipbuilding, and China-owned entities with similar names.
One American even walked into a travel agency asking for a China Airlines flight to Beijing!
Since early years of the Cold War in the 50s and 60s, there have been postal problems between China and Taiwan. Mail gets returned to the sender if he or she uses the name "Republic of China," because such mail is often sent to China instead of Taiwan.
Therefore, we have always used the name "Taiwan" or "Formosa" when the addressee is in Taiwan and tried not to use the word China, to be sure that the mail reaches to the Taiwan addressee.
Chen spoke on behalf of Taiwan's UN bid during his recent interview with members of the UN Correspondents Association.
He said that Taiwan's unfair exclusion from the world body was tantamount to being an "international vagabond" and thus the country was the "victim of political apartheid."
Despite Chen's comments, Taiwan was again rejected this year in its annual bid for UN membership.
The key issue is China's "one China" card. In fact, the "one China" view was inherited from the civil war between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party.
Based on the above facts, Taiwan should not stubbornly try to keep the name "Republic of China" or "ROC" to challenge China for its seat in the UN. Indeed, Taiwan now has not tried to revise the decision of UN, made more than 30 years ago, to have the PRC take Taiwan's seat to represent China.
(The ROC, on behalf of Taiwan, abandoned its UN membership at that time).
As long as Taiwan used the word "China" as part of the country's name, the UN would not and could not accept Taiwan's proposal.
Even so, Chen mentioned the examples of North and South Korea and West and East Germany. But Taiwan and China are not currently on an equal footing in the same way that the Koreas and Germanys are. Therefore, it would be wise for Taiwan to seek a new strategy.
One of the strategies that should be considered and developed is to not bother too much about acquiring UN membership, but instead concentrate the nation's efforts on maintaining a neutral position -- similar to what Switzerland did some years ago.
In doing so, Taiwan should immediately delete the name "ROC" and any other name including the word "China." As Chen said, Taiwan is Taiwan. The name Taiwan or Formosa has been recognized by the international community for centuries.
By settling on the name Taiwan, and working to maintain the country's neutrality, we believe that the UN in time will officially invite Taiwan to join the body as a member, instead of Taiwan lobbying for such membership.
Taiwan's investment in China: In accordance with your editorial entitled "Opening to the enemy" (June 30, page 8), it seems Taiwanese businesspeople should start searching for other locations for their enterprises outside of China.
Why in the world should Taiwan become stuck in China, when China has not appreciated Taiwan's economic contribution in these past years?
In order to relocate Taiwanese enterprises, the government should develop a national strategy, giving financial support to companies searching for good investment destinations in countries who are much friendlier to Taiwan.
Taiwanese businesspeople should also look for places with less political risk in order to receive the government's support.
The government should develop a plan similar to the Japanese government's plan, by supporting enterprises which pursue global markets and competition.
Taiwan, with its well-known high-tech businesses, should find no difficulty achieving world-class status and finding friendlier destinations for investment.
On economic diplomacy: an article published in the Taipei Times on Aug. 28 titled "Long view needed in economic diplomacy" is very perceptive.
The basic mistake made by the government in the past in aid programs to developing countries has been to give gifts instead of loans, like Japan.
The government should change this policy and use the method of the Japanese government on foreign aid programs as soon as possible.
In order to be successful, the government should work closely with Taiwan's private enterprises and use these enterprises as a vehicle to offer financial assistance to needy countries.
By doing so, it would not only enhance Taiwan's international position in making friends both politically and economically, but would also help Taiwan's enterprises enter international competition successfully and protectively.
To achieve the above proposed scenario, the first thing to do is to unite the pan-blue and pan-green camps and work together at this difficult time for the benefit of Taiwan's future prosperity and happiness, and not for personal gain.
After all, Taiwan is Taiwan, as Chen said. Taiwan should form a united front when facing harassment from an outside enemy who aims to harm the country's social welfare, freedom and happiness.
Yoshiko Tio
Houston, Texas
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS