In the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the international community, which largely follows a “one China” policy, was mostly oblivious to the fact that Taiwan’s health and medical network is in no sense subordinate to that of China or even connected to it. By pretending that Taiwan is part of China, many countries effectively allowed Taiwan to become orphaned from international health and medical networks.
In the process of controlling the coronavirus, Taiwan was for a time dragged down by China. It was treated as part of the outbreak zone and made subject to travel bans or restrictions by countries such as Italy.
Later on, China wanted to declare victory in the fight against the pandemic, but Taiwan was still discovering imported cases of COVID-19 among citizens returning from abroad. To claim that it had achieved zero new cases, China took the “bold step” of excluding Taiwan from its COVID-19 statistics.
It can be seen from this that even though China uses the rhetoric of “one China” to promote its unification strategy, it sees “one China” as dispensable under certain circumstances.
As for Taiwan, China sees it as a toxic issue that causes nothing but trouble.
Taiwan should exert the same boldness in its interactions with the international community as China did when excluding Taiwan. When deciding what to call itself, it should avoid using language that could cause confusion about Taiwan’s separate identity.
“Taiwan and China — one country on each side” is not so much an independence slogan as an accurate description of reality. For Taiwanese to call themselves “Taiwan” in their dealings with the international community does not symbolize Taiwanese independence — it merely reiterates the reality that Taiwan is not governed by China.
Changing the nation’s title in the Chinese language would involve amending the Constitution, but that does not mean that Taiwan can only use one name in English. In its foreign relations, the nation can follow the principle of highlighting “Taiwan” when naming itself in foreign-language documents, while doing its best to avoid formulas that are too similar to those of China.
This would help to ensure that the international community clearly recognizes the political reality that Taiwan and China do not own or rule one another.
For example, Taiwan does not use the title “Republic of China” when it takes part in international sports events or WTO meetings. These are all technical details of the way that administrative documents are translated into foreign languages. They also constitute a pragmatic approach to events concerning foreign relations that does not involve amending the Constitution or altering the cross-strait “status quo.”
Taiwan cooperates with the international community. Its performance as an outstanding member of the international community has been clear for all to see during the course of the pandemic and China cannot be allowed to steal Taiwan’s limelight.
As for China, its neglect of its duties as a member of the international community has attracted widespread condemnation, as has its dreadful record on human rights.
Hopefully the Taiwanese government will seize this rare opportunity and make good use of all available possibilities to make the international community clear about Taiwan’s sovereignty and independent status, while drawing a clear line between Taiwan and China.
Liu Chi-wei is a lawyer and director of the Northern Taiwan Society.
Translated by Julian Clegg
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
International debate on Taiwan is obsessed with “invasion countdowns,” framing the cross-strait crisis as a matter of military timetables and political opportunity. However, the seismic political tremors surrounding Central Military Commission (CMC) vice chairman Zhang Youxia (張又俠) suggested that Washington and Taipei are watching the wrong clock. Beijing is constrained not by a lack of capability, but by an acute fear of regime-threatening military failure. The reported sidelining of Zhang — a combat veteran in a largely unbloodied force and long-time loyalist of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — followed a year of purges within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
Immediately after the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) “Justice Mission” exercise at the end of last year, a question was posed to Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal regarding recent developments involving the exercises around Taiwan, and how he viewed their impact on regional peace and stability. His answer was somewhat perplexing to me as a curious student of Taiwanese affairs. “India closely follows developments across the Indo-Pacific region,” he said, adding: “We have an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region, in view of our significant trade, economic, people-to-people, and maritime interests. We urge all concerned