Frank Chiang (江永芳) of the Taiwan Public Policy Council has argued that Taiwan is not a state, since "there is no government constituting the government of the state of Taiwan" ("Sadly, Taiwan is still not a state" March 12, page 8). In so doing, his zeal for Taiwan's Independence ends up giving away the farm, intellectually speaking.
His comparison of the people of Taiwan to the Palestinians under Israeli occupation is insulting to the former. Taiwan truly has a de facto independence; and there is no further proof of it than Beijing's practical caution despite its stormy rhetoric. What this means is that if something walks, quacks, looks like, and acts like a duck, it's a duck; and if Taiwan looks, acts, and talks like a state, it's a state.
As a professor of law, Chiang should know as well that possession is nine-tenths of the law. Beijing does not possess Taiwan; but after two elections after which pan-blue generals stay at their posts under a pan-green president, it sure looks as if the people of Taiwan are exercising such possession.
Taiwan is as much the designation of a state as Albion (Britain), the Emerald Isle (Ireland), or any of a number of informal names used for various nation?states. The fact that the official name for Taiwan and associated islands is at present the Republic of China is moot, as is the precise legal interpretation of the documents signed at the end of World War II.
The fact of the matter is that whether Taiwan calls itself Taiwan, Republic of China, Da Liuqiu (大琉球), or even Bob, it is in fact a state that itself determines the admission or exclusion of nationals of any other state that might conceivably claim its territory. Or, conversely, treat it with the respect it deserves. It coins its own money, it collects taxes, and exercises an effective jurisdiction over its territory -- which Beijing does not.
The comparison of the Taiwanese to the Palestinians is insulting because the latter are under military occupation because Israel, the occupying power, won a defensive war against a coalition of states determined to destroy it and used the West Bank of the Jordan and Gaza as bases from which to attack.
In Taiwan's case, the only military force evident in Taiwan is one that is manned and officered by people who, for the most part, regard Taiwan and its associated islands as their home and, on return to civilian life, plan to contribute their energies to its peaceful development.
Those serving in Taiwan's military who might conceivably regard their homes as various provinces in China would delay return to such homes until such time as there is a permanent peace advantageous to Taiwan; that is, either Taiwan's de jure independence is recognized or China reunifies under a government that looks more like President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) Taiwan than like China under Mao Zedong (毛澤東).
Further, in the event of an attack by Beijing the civilian population of Taiwan would support the defensive efforts of its brothers, sons, nephews, and friends now manning the military bases in Taiwan. In this, the people of Taiwan seem to think and act like people who already have their own country -- indeed, their will to keep it seems strong. So Chiang's article also insults those now prepared to defend Taiwan with their lives.
Those who advocate the international recognition of Taiwan's de facto and de jure separate international status do themselves a great disservice by remaining stuck in a post-World War II decolonization or national liberation mode of thinking. Taiwan has a history very different from other countries and need not be ashamed of it. Rather, Taiwan, regardless of what it chooses to call itself should feel no need to deny any section of its history.
Americans, Canadians, Australians, and New Zealanders are by no means diminished when they call their languages "English" and acknowledge that they are culturally and in part ethnically akin to Great Britain.
The Taiwan of the near future -- which hopefully will enjoy international recognition and trade ambassadors with Beijing -- will lose nothing at all by seeing itself as heir to the Chinese culture and the Republic of China established in 1911 by Sun Yat-sen (孫中山); unless it is extreme nationalism's penchant for historical dishonesty.
Indeed, the people of Taiwan should see their history as offering an opportunity for a new way of looking at things rather than as a burden.
Chiang has no need to shortchange a land which he evidently loves.
Peter Herz
US
Lockheed Martin on Tuesday responded to concerns over delayed shipments of F-16V Block 70 jets, saying it had added extra shifts on its production lines to accelerate progress. The Ministry of National Defense on Monday said that delivery of all 66 F-16V Block 70 jets — originally expected by the end of next year — would be pushed back due to production line relocations and global supply chain disruptions. Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) said that Taiwan and the US are working to resolve the delays, adding that 50 of the aircraft are in production, with 10 scheduled for flight
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
Victory in conflict requires mastery of two “balances”: First, the balance of power, and second, the balance of error, or making sure that you do not make the most mistakes, thus helping your enemy’s victory. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a decisive and potentially fatal error by making an enemy of the Jewish Nation, centered today in the State of Israel but historically one of the great civilizations extending back at least 3,000 years. Mind you, no Israeli leader has ever publicly declared that “China is our enemy,” but on October 28, 2025, self-described Chinese People’s Armed Police (PAP) propaganda
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
RSS