Because of the limited size of Nauru's international airport, some sections of the Taiwanese media were unable to accompany President Chen Shui-bian (
Reporters from a certain cable TV station reportedly decided to display their dissatisfaction by boycotting the whole trip. This kind of righteous indignation is fair enough, but I am more interested in the insight this episode provides on the sorry state of Taiwan's diplomatic affairs.
Why is it that Taiwan is so diplomatically limited that we have to treasure a presidential visit to a country where only two aircraft can land at the national airport at any given time?
Why is it so difficult for Taiwan to participate in the international community?
The reason is that the Republic of China (ROC) withdrew from the UN 35 years ago this Oct. 26. As a result of this decision, our head of state must deal with Chinese pressure every time he makes an international visit; the WHO is bullied by China; the US is the only nation that dares sell Taiwan arms; and Taiwan has to endure humiliation by APEC.
I have never seen a well balanced report of this situation in the Taiwanese media. In the past, the propaganda machine of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government's educational system taught us that, to save face, the government had no choice but to walk out of the UN -- that the world body was not big enough to hold both the People's Republic of China and the ROC.
Historical documents, however, show that the dictator Chiang Kai-shek (
In 1970, the year before the ROC withdrew from the UN, then US president Richard Nixon promised in a meeting with then premier Yan Chia-kan (
Even French president Charles de Gaulle sent a telegram to Chiang urging him not to make a rash decision to leave the world body.
To save face, Chiang said that he'd rather stand on principle than accept humiliation, preferring to instead turn Taiwan into an orphan in the international community. Abandoned, oppressed and threatened by Chinese missiles, the Taiwanese people are now constantly in crisis.
In their eagerness to punish Chen for his family's perceived wrongdoings, many academics have lately been talking about transitional justice. As I see it, true transitional justice entails settling past injustices. Yet in the current debate, the buck surprisingly stops at former president Lee Teng-hui (
No one has the courage to challenge the institutional violence applied by Chiang. Despite Chiang's betrayal of the nation, even a change to the name of an airport bearing his name is today enough to set off a nationwide argument.
The fact that Chiang was a dictator is irrefutable, and changing the name of the airport in Taoyuan would be in keeping with the spirit of transitional justice.
Why don't I hear the same people who have been singing the praises of transitional justice come out in support of this change?
Tien Chiu-chin is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
RSS