A legacy of goodwill
I was deeply moved by the article about the decision of the family of Su Chia-sheng (蘇家陞) to donate his organs so that other people have a chance of a longer and better life (“Family of Formosa Fun Coast fatality donates organs,” July 11, page 1). Being a professor at Taipei Medical University, where Su studied before his tragic death, I am naturally personally affected, and send my deepest condolences to the family.
It also reminded me of the plot of the movie Jesus of Montreal by one of the world’s most brilliant directors, Denys Arcand. In the movie, the main character, who portrays Jesus in a theater production, dies and his organs are then donated, allowing others to live again, alluding to the miracle of Jesus’ resurrection.
Through his organ donation, Su has become the “Jesus of Taipei,” which is a wonderful legacy to leave. I mean to draw this parallel without any religious connotations, as I am well aware that several different religions are followed in Taiwan — rather, what I mean to say is that the act of donating organs is an act of goodwill toward other humans which should be encouraged and supported by all of humanity’s belief systems. Too many people need organs urgently, and this simple act of goodwill can save so many.
Bruno Walther
Taipei
What is our nationality?
There are two Koreas in the world today, South Korea and North Korea, but we have not heard of a “one Korea” policy, although they are looking for a unified nation. Furthermore, before the reunification of East and West Germany, there was not a “one Germany” policy. Why then is there a “one China” policy? Isn’t it funny no one advocates for one USA, one Japan, one France or one Russia? Why does China keep asking for one China? Obviously, there is more than one.
Yes, after World War II China exploded into civil war and the Republic of China (ROC) led by Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) was defeated by the Chinese Communist Party led by Mao Zedong (毛澤東). Chiang and his followers escaped to Taiwan as political refugees, but they were recognized by the US as the exiled Chinese government and were a part of the UN until Oct. 25, 1971, when they were expelled under UN Resolution 2758.
Chiang’s followers, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) members, claimed sovereignty over Taiwan by twisting US General Douglas MacArthur’s General Order No. 1 and requested that the Allies transfer Taiwan to the ROC. They simply did not understand that the No. 1 order was given to Chiang, not the ROC, and that sovereignty is never possessed by an individual, it can only be transferred between governments under the authorization of a peace treaty.
Ma said he agreed with article 4 of the Treaty of Taipei, Japan voided all Sino-Japan treaties prior to Dec. 9, 1941 and Taiwan’s sovereignty transferred to China. However, that is not accurate because article 5 of the same treaty said it was only valid back to Sept. 7, 1901, thus it did not touch the Shimonoseki Treaty of 1895 in which the Ching Emperor ceded Formosa and the Pescadores to Japan in perpetuity.
Paradoxically, the ROC does not have sovereignty over Kinmen and Matsu. The complication is that the ROC is not an independent nation, but it still holds sovereignty over the Chinese territories of Kinmen and Matsu, and rules over Taiwan. That is why the US’ Taiwan policy always employs the Three Communiques for the China issue, and the Taiwan Relations Act for the Taiwan issue.
However, the US’ “one China” policy is always twisted into a one China principle, with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the ROC both claiming Taiwan. They both agree with the so-called “1992 consensus” and “one China, respective interpretations,” but the ROC has never been accepted by the PRC. Now, KMT presumptive presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) has taken it even further to “one China, same interpretation” to avoid the two-state theory — so she derecognized the ROC and endorsed the PRC’s claim of the “one China” principle.
The PRC recently offered ROC citizens the Mainland Travel Permit (MTP) to travel to China. It is identical to the ID cards for residents of Hong Kong and Macau. This returns us to the fundamental issue of the Taiwan Strait: Is Taiwan part of China? What is Taiwanese nationality? What travel document should Taiwanese carry?
On March 18, 2008, US District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer informed us in her opinion statement that Taiwanese are people without a state. The current travel document Taiwanese carry is the passport issued by the ROC, which is a nation without international recognition and without sovereignty. Now, the PRC wants to issue the MTP for Taiwanese to travel around the world, but will it be legal internationally?
This is a serious issue for Taiwanese; not having legal authorization to carry a valid travel document. Taiwanese were deemed to be included as nationals of the ROC under article 10 of the Treaty of Taipei, but it was abrogated by the Japanese government on Sept. 29, 1972. Now, we really are stateless. We are nobody. We do not even have a legal national name. Shall we call our nation the ROC, the PRC, the US, Japan or the Republic of Taiwan? Taiwanese, what is our nationality?
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS