For a few days it proudly flew, nudged between Syria and Tajikistan, amid rows of national flags festooning London’s Regent Street as the city prepares for the Olympics. Suddenly, for reasons unknown, but easily guessed at, it was pulled down, leaving a sad gap in the otherwise festive display of global fraternity.
Granted, the Republic of China (ROC) flag is for many people not a national flag but rather a symbol of a regime that imposed itself on Taiwan after World War II, one that, furthermore, unleashed decades of repression on its people. And yet, despite all the hardships, it now stands as the most readily recognizable symbol of nationhood for all Taiwanese.
Yes, it was first woven as the symbol of a political party in China; and yes, it officially stands for the ROC, but over the years, through the long process of democratization and national consolidation, both the ROC and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) have become part of the fabric that makes Taiwan what it is today. For people outside Asia who know little about this region’s convoluted history, nothing more immediately distinguishes Taiwan from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) than the ROC flag.
The reaction among Taiwanese worldwide to the removal of the flag on Regent Street testifies to the strength of that symbol. Hours after it was taken down, online social networks and blogs exploded with “before and after” pictures of the street, accompanied by expressions of anger and indignation. Thousands of people — mostly young Taiwanese — mobilized, providing contact information about the civic organization that is responsible for the site, writing letters and visiting the location to take pictures of themselves holding the flag.
With very few exceptions, all referred to the flag as standing for Taiwan, not the KMT or the ROC, and reaffirmed their pride in being Taiwanese, which confirms the view that the once-exogenous flag has been rehabilitated into an indigenous one. Though it took over Taiwan, the ROC has since been absorbed by it, resulting in a symbiotic relationship that continually redefines itself and gives Taiwan its identity.
The strong reaction among Taiwanese, though prompted by disheartening political realities, is encouraging. For one, it debunks the claim that young Taiwanese today are apolitical and cannot be bothered with the future of their homeland. It shows us that on fundamental issues of justice, young Taiwanese will not sit idly by. It also tells us that despite their busy lives (several of those who mobilized are graduate students scattered all over the world), they know who they are and will not countenance anyone telling them otherwise.
One young Taiwanese living in the US could not have put it more bluntly, saying: “Fuck that de facto shit,” referring to Taiwan’s sovereign status.
Another offshoot of this incident is that it demonstrates yet again that despite currently stable relations in the Taiwan Strait, the 23 million Taiwanese continue to live under a shadow that prevents them from exercising their rights as citizens of the world. China’s “goodwill” and “peaceful” cross-strait relations remain contingent on Beijing seeing no true expression of Taiwanese statehood, irrespective of the venue. It has since been confirmed that the flag incident on Regent Street was the result of complaints by Chinese representatives, accentuating China’s refusal to acknowledge the existence of Taiwanese as a people.
With the world’s eyes turned on London over the next few weeks, this is the perfect occasion for Taiwanese and their supporters to express who they are and to demonstrate that the so-called “peace” has rotten foundations. As one flag is ignominiously taken down, hundreds, thousands more should bloom all over London. For the next two weeks, London will be the world’s stage. This is an opportunity not to be missed.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has created a dilemma that could soon cause him to be hoisted with his own petard, bringing his leadership of China to an end. His threatening rhetoric over the unification of Taiwan with China, in which he has said, “we are willing to draw blood if necessary,” has placed Xi in a corner. Xi is portrayed as a strong world leader, yet he has created a scenario for himself that most likely would have an unfavorable outcome. With the 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) scheduled to convene this month, Xi cannot
The 77th session of the UN General Assembly opened on Sept. 13. More than 10 overseas Taiwanese organizations had submitted a petition to the UN secretary-general, protesting that 23.5 million Taiwanese are excluded from representation. As president of the Taiwan United Nations Alliance, I also submitted a letter to the UN, saying that Taiwanese should have the right to be represented under the name of Taiwan. The government has been asking its allies to support Taiwan’s entry into the UN, but under its official name, the Republic of China (ROC). Doing so would have involved the right to represent China, with
I was privileged to meet with many of Taiwan’s leaders and leading thinkers during a study tour visit in August. One theme I heard several times during that trip was that bad relations between the United States and China benefit Taiwan. At first thought, I empathize with the argument. After all, there is a troubling record of America’s leaders negotiating with Beijing over the heads of Taiwan’s leaders. For example, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt returned Taiwan to China after World War II. President Richard Nixon surprised Taiwan leaders with his 1972 trip to China. President Jimmy Carter unilaterally chose to normalize
Washington’s “one China” policy has not changed and the US does not take a position on Taiwan’s sovereignty issue, a US Department of State spokesperson has said. He said that this has been the principle of US policy toward Taiwan since 1979, and the policy has remained in effect. He also said that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has privately made this clear to Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅). The US’ “one China” policy and China’s “one China” principle recognize China as the “representative of China.” The two diverge on the issue of Taiwan: Beijing asserts sovereignty