A post by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Facebook page administrator about the absence of the term “Republic of China” (ROC) on the nameplate of the nation’s representative office in Somaliland has again renewed the debate about whether “Taiwan” or the “Republic of China” is a more fitting designation for the nation.
The post was met with raging criticism from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which puts the ROC title on a pedestal, prompting a statement by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) assuring that the term “ROC” is not a redundancy and that bringing the “ROC (Taiwan)” to the global stage is essential to the nation’s diplomatic efforts.
Tsai’s stance shows that, as much as some people in the pan-green camp have longed to do away with the long-outdated ROC title, it is not going away any time soon.
The way in which Tsai refers to the nation has quietly changed from “ROC, Taiwan” — as seen in a letter of congratulations on the establishment of twin city ties between Yilan and Rockville, Maryland, last year — to “ROC (Taiwan).” Which designation the government puts in parentheses becomes a critical question, as different expressions will have different connotations in the international arena.
The current nomenclature used by the Tsai administration suggests that it regards “ROC” as being more significant, whereas the name “Taiwan” is parenthetical, almost an afterthought.
The use of parentheses implies that rather than scrapping the ROC title, the administration would opt for a middle-of-the-road approach — for which China will likely struggle to find a legitimate reason to protest.
Given that the two names are likely to coexist for the foreseeable future, it would behoove the government to get its priorities straight and review its use of parentheses. It should consider whether it wants to promote “Taiwan” or “the ROC” on the global stage, as the latter is too close to China’s official title and has limited Taiwan’s international space for decades.
When considering that Tsai has referred to herself as the “president of Taiwan” at several international events, the answer to that question becomes crystal clear.
The “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait has imposed many restrictions on efforts to help the nation achieve self-determination, to the extent that Taiwanese dare not even pass a referendum calling for the national sports team to compete in the Olympic Games under its proper name.
Moreover, the ruling party has refrained from removing the phrase “unification of the nation” from the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例), which is an internal law of which the removal would not have any measurable effect on China.
By comparison, formulating a meaningful and memorable designation for the nation is subtle and therefore more likely to succeed. This, coupled with a pair of motions passed by lawmakers last month calling for the redesigning of passport covers and fuselages of China Airlines aircraft to include more Taiwanese motifs, would greatly help the nation distinguish itself from China.
Reversing the order of “Taiwan” and “ROC” would be a minor change, but it would have a profound effect on helping the nation gain international visibility, and is worth the government’s every effort.
In the past month, two important developments are poised to equip Taiwan with expanded capabilities to play foreign policy offense in an age where Taiwan’s diplomatic space is seriously constricted by a hegemonic Beijing. Taiwan Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) led a delegation of Taiwan and US companies to the Philippines to promote trilateral economic cooperation between the three countries. Additionally, in the past two weeks, Taiwan has placed chip export controls on South Africa in an escalating standoff over the placing of its diplomatic mission in Pretoria, causing the South Africans to pause and ask for consultations to resolve
An altercation involving a 73-year-old woman and a younger person broke out on a Taipei MRT train last week, with videos of the incident going viral online, sparking wide discussions about the controversial priority seats and social norms. In the video, the elderly woman, surnamed Tseng (曾), approached a passenger in a priority seat and demanded that she get up, and after she refused, she swung her bag, hitting her on the knees and calves several times. In return, the commuter asked a nearby passenger to hold her bag, stood up and kicked Tseng, causing her to fall backward and
In December 1937, Japanese troops captured Nanjing and unleashed one of the darkest chapters of the 20th century. Over six weeks, hundreds of thousands were slaughtered and women were raped on a scale that still defies comprehension. Across Asia, the Japanese occupation left deep scars. Singapore, Malaya, the Philippines and much of China endured terror, forced labor and massacres. My own grandfather was tortured by the Japanese in Singapore. His wife, traumatized beyond recovery, lived the rest of her life in silence and breakdown. These stories are real, not abstract history. Here is the irony: Mao Zedong (毛澤東) himself once told visiting
When I reminded my 83-year-old mother on Wednesday that it was the 76th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, she replied: “Yes, it was the day when my family was broken.” That answer captures the paradox of modern China. To most Chinese in mainland China, Oct. 1 is a day of pride — a celebration of national strength, prosperity and global stature. However, on a deeper level, it is also a reminder to many of the families shattered, the freedoms extinguished and the lives sacrificed on the road here. Seventy-six years ago, Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東)
RSS