The real threat to the ROC
In 1994, when Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) ran for Taipei mayor, his slogan was: “Republic of China to Battle.”
In 2000, the presidential election resulted in the first transition of power. The deep blues were in mourning and thought that it was the end of the Republic of China (ROC).
However, even though Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won two consecutive elections, the ROC continues to exist.
DPP presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) advocates maintaining the “status quo” under the ROC constitutional system and promises to keep peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. In other words, after she is elected, she will not allow those three words — Republic of China — to be extinguished.
Ironically, people within the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) continue to chime in with China’s point of view, advocating the idea that there is “one China, with both sides having the same interpretation” of what that China is, that both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to “one China” and that there will be eventual unification with China, without seeming to realize that it would mean the end of the Republic of China. This is because the People’s Republic of China (PRC) replaced the ROC when it joined the UN in 1971 and it became the only government to legitimately represent China.
“One China” means the PRC and that would of course continue to be the nation’s name after unification.
KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) has characterized the ongoing drama within the KMT of replacing the party’s presidential candidate, Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), as a matter of national salvation at a critical moment in time.
To borrow a phrase that Chen often used during his presidency: Is it really that important?
Transitions of power are the norm in a democracy.
Who asked the KMT to get involved in such fierce infighting?
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration has led Taiwan into a mess, into a terrible condition.
The public wants change: If they cannot do their job properly, the public should change the people and the party in charge, and see if it helps.
Hsu Meng-pi
Taipei
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