‘Healthy, together’
In a crescendo of invectives, Tzou Jiing-wen (鄒景雯) unfairly criticizes the country I am proud to represent in Taiwan (“Italy’s ignorance must be checked,” March 6, page 8).
Tzou faults Italy for adopting measures, such as the reduction of flights and the restriction of travelers from COVID-19 affected areas, that Taiwan itself has adopted. While Tzou blames Italy’s alleged “hostility,” she forgets that as recently as June last year Italy granted Taiwanese passport holders a fast track through e-gates in Italian airports. Such privilege — currently enjoyed by only eight jurisdictions — was never put in doubt by Italy.
Equally, Italy always abstained from advising against traveling to Taiwan, even when Taiwan enjoyed a clear initial advantage in the grim tally of COVID-19 cases.
Italy’s intention, as alleged by Tzou, “to inconvenience the Taiwanese” ignores the fact that COVID-19 landed at Italy’s doorstep as it has at Taiwan’s and that both sides have been doing their best to deal with the situation.
Unlike Taiwan, Italy is not an island. Its belonging to a vast integrated and multinational area such as the EU, larger economic clout and status as a major world tourism destination infinitely complicate the containment efforts of the virus that are being carried out by Italian authorities.
Describing the ongoing mobilization efforts made at all levels by Italy’s authorities and the entire Italian nation through the dismissive words used by the article’s author is crude and insensitive.
Moreover, Tzou’s call for “countermeasures” in the economic and trade spheres is ill-advised and runs counter to both sides’ interest to avoid an unnecessary spill-out effect of decisions concerning health into the trade domain.
In light of Italy’s membership in the EU, trade-related Taiwanese reactions multilateralize any bilateral temporary dispute. This risks damaging Taiwan’s wider interests.
Italy and Taiwan enjoy a growing and mutually beneficial trade relationship that it is in both sides’ interest to preserve and nurture. If something has to be checked it is not Italy’s ignorance, but rather the misleading advice offered by Tzou. The current extraordinary times we are all facing require more levelheaded and deft reasoning than was advocated in her article.
I find in the slogan “Italy and Taiwan: healthy, together” put forward by my office and endorsed by Taiwan’s authorities a more apt way forward. We should stress what unites and not what — temporarily — divides.
I am confident that this more constructive and compassionate spirit will find wider resonance in Taiwan than Tzou’s words.
Davide Giglio,
Italian representative to Taiwan
Italian Economic, Trade and Cultural Promotion Office
Academia Sinica’s name
Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Fan Yun (范雲) recently questioned the English name of Academia Sinica, a title that could mislead people into thinking it is a Chinese institution (“Virus outbreak: Academia Sinica rejects China’s virus reagent claim,” March 10, page 1).
She suggested that it be named Academia Taiwanica instead, to clarify its status as Taiwanese. In response to this suggestion, Hugo Tseng (曾泰元), an associate professor in Soochow University’s Department of English Language and Literature, submitted an article to the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) counseling caution on any decision to change the English name.
The name Academia Sinica is Latin, and means “Chinese academy.” The “sinica” part could, indeed, lead people to believe, incorrectly, that it is a Chinese institution, and connect it with the country internationally recognized as the People’s Republic of China.
However, Tseng said that this misinterpretation presupposes that the reader is an academic with sufficiently good English, coupled with a certain degree of understanding of Latin.
Tseng makes an interesting point, but one that shows why the name does require “rectification.”
Given the sheer amount and diversity of academic research and published papers internationally, the majority of people would have little interest in, or call to read, studies by Academica Sinica, and as such, very few would be in danger of being misled by its name.
Only those who come into contact with the findings of Academia Sinica studies, and who have “sufficiently good English, coupled with a certain degree of understanding of Latin,” might mistakenly believe the “sinica” refers to the country China.
Second, the contention that the name might “make people mistakenly believe” this to be the case is getting things round the wrong way. Since it is Academia Sinica that uses that name to refer to itself, where exactly does the misunderstanding come from?
On the one hand, many of the institute’s research findings are published in Western academic circles under the name of Academia Sinica, and the institute’s exemplary reputation was hard-won. This is something Academia Sinica really needs to take into consideration when deciding whether or not to change its name.
On the other, the hard-won reputation of Academia Sinica is unfortunate in that, to the many international academics with “sufficiently good English, coupled with a certain degree of understanding of Latin,” this reputation is linked with the word “sinica,” which is in turn linked with China.
If the name is not “rectified” at this point, the hard work of academia in Taiwan will continue to be attributed to someone else.
Whether the name is to be changed or not needs to be carefully weighed up, putting aside for the moment all of the historical baggage behind the issue.
TACO
Taipei
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS