Some readers might find this article too idealistic, but it is time to infuse some idealism into Taiwanese society.
People might change their names to please others in exchange for benefit and profit, but this is not a decent thing to do. However, this is precisely what our government has been doing in response to pressure from China.
The Republic of China (ROC) was not allowed to join the WTO, so it changed its name to the “Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu” to become a WTO member.
Nor is the ROC allowed to participate in international sports events, so it changed its name to “Chinese Taipei” to make participation possible.
There are several reasons for the nation doing so: to obtain some benefit, to improve Taiwan’s “visibility” and to avoid being “isolated” in the international community.
However, these arguments can be refuted by anyone who advocates using “Taiwan” as the nation’s name.
First, when it comes to international organizations that do not accept the name “Taiwan,” Taiwanese should boycott them and not participate in them for the sake of the nation’s dignity. Some benefits should be sacrificed.
Second, so-called “visibility” is not worth pursuing at the cost of the nation’s dignity.
Taiwanese should model themselves after Nordic countries — they do not host that many big international sports events, fairs and so on, yet they are highly visible in the world, because they have sound democracies, freedom and human rights, comprehensive welfare systems, narrow wealth gaps and international humanitarian policies.
When France was defeated in the Franco-Prussian War, the peace treaty was extremely harsh to France — in addition to having to cede territory to Prussia, it also had to pay a war indemnity of 5 billion francs, an astronomical figure.
It was widely expected that France would be crushed by this huge debt and never be able to regain its feet.
However, to the world’s astonishment, the French took it as such a humiliation and blow to their reputation that they worked hard to increase production and made generous monetary contributions to quickly pay off the indemnity.
This tells us that a nation’s wounded pride can spark miraculous results, which once again highlights the importance of a nation’s dignity. Perhaps this is something that Taiwanese can learn from.
Third, if international organizations do not accept the nation’s participation under the name “Taiwan,” then Taiwanese should boycott them and reject participation. If this results in the nation’s isolation, it would be a matter of “honorable isolation,” and Taiwanese should accept it fearlessly so that their descendants can proudly cherish a legacy of forebears who bravely and heroically accepted international isolation at a heavy cost to maintain their dignity.
Perhaps doing so could become another milestone in the history of the world.
The only choice that Taiwanese have is to walk down one of these two paths: to reject the nation’s name and swallow the humiliation of being manipulated by others — for the sake of maintaining a few benefits — or to bravely accept an “honorable isolation” and to pay the painful price for it — for the sake of maintaining the nation’s dignity.
Those who advocate changing the nation’s name to “Taiwan” should help other Taiwanese understand that the dignity of the citizenry is more important than anything else — once Taiwanese lose their dignity, the nation will decline.
Peng Ming-min was a senior adviser to former president Chen Shui-bian.
Translated by Lin Lee-Kai
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his