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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
RSS