In analyzing the Chinese military’s four days of live-fire exercises around Taiwan proper, talking heads on Taiwanese political television programs expended a great deal of time explaining why the Ministry of National Defense did not issue an air-defense warning when China’s military fired ballistic missiles into outer space above Taiwan.
However, the significance of the missile launches is not how high they flew, but the intent behind their use and where they landed.
China claimed that the missiles had “accurately hit their targets,” which included impact points near Taiwan’s vital ports. This demonstrates that Beijing possesses the intent and the capability to implement a blockade of Taiwan.
It is insufficient for the government to issue a strong protest against China’s behavior. The nation’s diplomatic corps must rally the international community and make the case for an international convention on Taiwan.
Taiwanese must also unite, and with one voice demand that Beijing cease engaging in hostile military behavior. Taiwanese must also call on the international community to pay closer attention to the nation’s security needs, by making the argument that Taiwan’s continued existence as a free nation is vital to upholding international law and world peace.
If the world does not take immediate action to constrain China’s bellicose and destructive behavior, recent history tells us what will happen next. When the international community failed to prevent Nazi Germany from invading neighboring nations during the mid-1930s, the seeds of World War II were sown and it was not long before the human race was once again afflicted with a great calamity.
Ministry of National Defense spokespersons, think tanks and even pan-green-camp-aligned talking heads on television frequently refer to China’s military as the “communist forces” (共軍) and China, the country, as the “Chinese communists” (中共). This shows that many in Taiwan are in a state of cognitive confusion over Taiwan’s status and the nature of the regime on the other side of the Taiwan Strait.
This is the language of a bygone era, when Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) nationalist forces were fighting an armed rebellion of “communist bandits” in China during the Chinese Civil War.
If Taiwanese wish to amend the nation’s official name, they should start by rectifying how they refer to China’s military. There is no such entity as the “communist forces” — the rest of the world calls that institution by its official name: the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. Similarly, they should refer to China by its official name: the People’s Republic of China.
If Taiwanese do not refer to China by its proper name, they will never be able to obtain the right to the name of their own country and the cognitive confusion would continue.
When Beijing says that “there is only one China in the world and its name is the ‘People’s Republic of China,’” it is not wrong. By the same logic, there is only one Taiwan in the world and its 36,000km2 of sovereign territory belongs to 23 million Taiwanese and nobody else.
Taiwanese must start by rectifying how they refer to China, then amend the Republic of China Constitution, rectify the nation’s official name and put clear blue water between Taiwan and China. These are vital steps necessary for Taiwanese to uphold the country’s sovereignty and independence, territorial integrity and national security.
Yao Meng-chang is an assistant professor in Fujen Catholic University’s Department of Postgraduate Legal Studies.
Translated by Edward Jones
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
RSS