Taiwanese have elected four presidents since the first direct presidential election in 1996: Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) in 1996, Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in 2000 and 2004, Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2008 and 2012 and Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) this year. Apart from Ma, who took a more pro-China approach, all other presidents have understood that Taiwan is a nation.
These directly elected presidents are different from earlier presidents of the Republic of China (ROC), who were elected by the National Assembly (國民大會), which was made up of representatives of China. Politically speaking, it is clear that Taiwan is a new nation that is separate from China.
However, this is not the way things are; the ROC Constitution and the governmental system originate from China, which is governed by the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — which was exiled from China to Taiwan in 1949 and then became the occupying ruler of Taiwan — has used its China ideology to hijack Taiwan’s national identity. Even after direct presidential elections were introduced, this connection has not been severed. The KMT seems unable to solve the issue, but what about other Taiwanese political parties?
The “Republic of China” is the title that powerful Taiwanese use when they talk to the public, but the international community knows the nation as Taiwan. Confusion over the “ROC” and the “PRC” in terms of national identity causes Taiwanese to get lost in a psychopathology of national dignity and nationality identity crisis. It also confuses many entrepreneurs, intellectuals and politicians.
We are clearly Taiwanese, and our nation is clearly known as Taiwan internationally. When we travel to other countries, we are still Taiwanese, but what is the name of our nation? Our own government reluctantly sometimes calls itself the “Republic of China (Taiwan),” but when participating in international events or games, it is called “Chinese Taipei,” with “China” and “Chinese” rigidly tied to “Taipei” — a reduced and belittled Taiwan. Is Taiwan really the same thing as Taipei?
Although Taiwanese can directly elect a president, the China problem has not been resolved. Since 1949, the KMT would rather lose the nation than lose a title. Even worse, in Taiwan, the ideological view that the nation’s name is the “Republic of China” continues to push the nation toward China, and this only serves to support the PRC’s ambition to annex Taiwan. As time passes, this long-standing problem has become a habit and Taiwanese have settled into the “status quo,” creating a deadlock that the nation’s directly elected presidents have been unable to break.
This is the national status: an unclear and vague title, and it is the character of Taiwanese — being unable to say what nation they are citizens of. If Taiwanese cannot resolve this problem, should it be left to other nations to resolve? With an emerging conflict between the US and China, Taiwan also comes in the media spotlight. Is Taiwan voluntarily settling for a humiliating survival in this unclear “status quo”? Perhaps not.
Will we stand up and face our true self?
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS