In a joint letter on Dec. 17 last year, 78 members of the US House of Representatives urged US President Donald Trump to rename the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO) in Washington “Taiwan Representative Office.”
During a legislative interpellation session on Monday last week, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Harry Tseng (曾厚仁) said the renaming is “in progress.”
This is a sign of the normalization of Taiwan-US relations, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has since issued two “clarifications,” saying that “in progress” means that the renaming is an ongoing effort, but is not yet in the process of implementation. The ministry’s attitude clearly shows that it has lost its enthusiasm, and it also reveals its thinking on US policy.
Taiwan-US relations have in the past few years improved, and the US Congress has passed the Taiwan Travel Act and other bipartisan, Taiwan-friendly bills.
The US government has also raised political exchanges to a higher level and strengthened the two nations’ security relationship, leading to visits to Taiwan by high-ranking US officials, such as US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach, and US Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar.
The 11 arms sales approved by the Trump administration have greatly increased Taiwan’s defense capability. The US regards Taiwan as a strategic partner in its Indo-Pacific deployments, and preventing Taiwan from annexation by China is in the shared interest of the two sides.
After last year’s US presidential election, Congress passed the Taiwan Assurance Act, which stipulates the normalization of arms sales and transfers to Taiwan.
As President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has rightly said: “Supporting Taiwan is now mainstream US opinion, and it is also a bipartisan consensus.”
Pro-Taiwan voices in the US are calling for further normalization of exchanges. This includes the promotion and renaming of the two sides’ representative offices, which highlights that Taiwan is not part of China and better reflects the state of bilateral ties.
Marking the 40th anniversary of the US’ Taiwan Relations Act last year, the then-Coordination Council for North American Affairs — the Taiwese counterpart of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) — was officially renamed the Taiwan Council for US Affairs. Subsequently, observers are also proposing the name change of the TECRO.
Furthermore, bipartisan members of Congress proposed a bill that would require the appointment of the AIT director to follow ambassadorial appointment procedure, including the confirmation and approval by the US Senate.
In its October report, the House of Representatives’ China Task Force also recommended TECRO’s renaming.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo would be responsible for such a move, which would not require any legal amendments.
Given the current relationship between the two countries, there is considerable room for this to happen. Moreover, the removal of the words “economic” and “cultural,” which indicate the office’s functions, but also restrict its role, and using the name “Taiwan” better reflect the deepened bilateral ties.
It is like Netherlands Office Taipei Representative Guy Wittich said on April 27, announcing that the Netherlands Trade and Investment Office had been renamed Netherlands Office Taipei: Removing “trade and investment” from the name opens more possibilities.
It is only logical that Taiwan should use “Taiwan” in the name of its US office.
However, Taiwan has not responded very well to the goodwill of the US political community. In addition to the ministry’s “clarifications,” it has neither confirmed its own stance on the issue nor a preferred time line.
During the US presidential transition period, the government is overly cautious to prioritizing issues related to the deepening of Taiwan-US relations.
Although it is not the first time that the ministry has clarified remarks made by Tseng during interpellation sessions, the clear contradiction between his recent remarks and the ministry’s interpretation thereof shows that the government is trying to play down the issues.
Using “Taiwan” meets the long-standing expectations of mainstream public opinion, and it avoids being confused with China on the international stage.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, large public events have in most countries come to a halt, but thanks to Taiwan’s handling of the pandemic, the CPBL has resumed its games, allowing it to stand out from the rest of the world as the first professional baseball league to start a new season.
This is a good thing, but the word “Chinese” in CPBL has caused misunderstanding in the international media, and some have mistakenly reported that the CPBL is a Chinese league. AIT Director Brent Christensen suggested that “Taiwan” be added to the league’s name to avoid confusion.
Taiwan’s donation of masks and other medical supplies to countries in need is another good thing, but due to the national carrier’s name — China Airlines — some people thought that the donations came from China, impeding Taiwan’s diplomatic endeavors. This is why the name of the nation’s representative offices must be changed.
To shrink Taiwan’s international leeway, China has been poaching the nation’s diplomatic allies, attempting to eliminate the Republic of China from the international stage.
Beijing has spent the past few years increasing pressure on countries with no diplomatic relations with Taiwan to replace the word “Taiwan” with “Taipei” in the nation’s representative offices.
Beijing wants to eliminate Taiwan’s international status, to which Pompeo has responded that there is a bipartisan consensus in the US that “Taiwan has not been a part of China.”
As the US is expected to continue to oppose China and support Taiwan, the government should make a larger effort to push for a name change of its US offices.
Taiwan’s friends in the US would see that the issue is jointly prioritized by the US and Taiwan. Correcting the names of Taiwan’s offices should not be a mission “in progress,” but a mission completed.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers