Whether the nation should be called “Taiwan” or go by various other titles has long been a subject of debate.
There is a common misunderstanding within the government and among the public concerning the title “Chinese Taipei,” which is used at international sporting events and other international activities. Some people think it is a fairly non-political term and more of a cultural one, but it has the political sense of possession.
Morocco used to be known as “French Morocco” when it was a French protectorate — or colony — from 1912 to 1955. The “French” in French Morocco was not a cultural adjective, but rather conveyed a sense of possession, so the same must be true of the “Chinese” in “Chinese Taipei.” If Taiwanese realized this, they would probably find the name much harder to accept.
However, there are also some Taiwanese athletes who fear that if the name is changed, they would no longer be allowed to compete. Their main concern is for themselves.
It is not just an issue for athletes, because many Taiwanese come under pressure from China. Nonetheless, we who call for Taiwan to be called by its proper name do so across the board. Our main concern is not whether we have a field to play on or stage to stand on, rather we hope that those who come after us will be free to do whatever they want, instead of being restricted like we are today.
So yes, athletes might feel that they are being sacrificed, but if we do not act now, nothing will change.
If future generations have a field to play on, it would be because of an act of charity by people who look down on us. What glory would there be in that?
Local athletes have made a wise move by putting forward the example of African American athlete Jesse Owens at the 1936 Berlin Olympics in relation to the current campaign launched by Team Taiwan Campaign for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Unfortunately, they only talk about half the example.
Although Owens eventually decided to take part in the Berlin Olympics, before he made that decision, he, in open letters and media interviews, denounced the Nazis’ discrimination of and racism against minorities.
His reason for not withdrawing from the Games might have been that, back then, black people also suffered from severe discrimination in the US. Under segregationist policies, they could only sit in the back of buses and there were separate schools for blacks and whites. Even in the White House there were separate offices and toilets for black and white staff.
US society did not give Owens its wholehearted support. Even after winning four gold medals in Berlin, he was not invited to the White House and received no congratulations from then-US president Franklin D. Roosevelt. Of course, in 1936, the US had not yet had a black president.
In the campaign for Team Taiwan, I have not heard of anyone urge athletes to withdraw from the Games or demand that they pull out. Rather, you might say that it is China that wants “Taiwan” to withdraw.
It is problematic to interpret the issue according to the example of Owens. Two points on which we can learn from Owens are that he clearly objected to the Nazis’ policies and that he was proud of his identity as a black person. That is why people remember not only his heroic performance in track and field events, but also his efforts to promote human rights and justice.
While we hope everyone is proud of their nation, speaking out against injustice is a moral duty that should not be forgotten.
Chang Jui-chuan is a lecturer of English in the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures at National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own