Taiwanese-American Amy Lee submitted a letter to the Taipei Times yesterday morning. It is printed on this page. It is about Saturday’s presidential election, but more generally is about the perceptions and misperceptions overseas about Taiwan and about the right of Taiwanese not only to make their own decisions about their future, but also to take control of how they perceive their past and their identity.
Two phrases stand out: “So I grew up correcting those who mistake Taiwan for Thailand, the Burmese flag as ours,” and “As the world enjoyed our bubble milk tea, I could barely swallow mine.”
A decade ago, few people around the world seemed to know where Taiwan was on the map, and even fewer had any idea about its recent history or its relationship with China. How frustrating and demoralizing this would be for Taiwanese who are proud of their identity and past.
However, it is not surprising, because of the complexity of the issue, especially when the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is doing its level and persistent best to obfuscate the truth to support its own interests and unfounded claim over Taiwan.
This is changing. In the post-COVID-19 pandemic era, Taiwan’s international profile has much increased, and so has the understanding of the importance of having an objective grasp of the truth.
The change in the US’ approach to Taiwan is well-documented. Zsuzsa Anna Ferenczy, an assistant professor at National Dong Hwa University in Hualien County, highlighted in a recent Taipei Times opinion piece (“Deep Taiwan-EU ties hard to break,” Jan. 10, page 8) how Europe’s understanding of Taiwan’s importance has progressed in recent years, as well as how closely European national leaders would be watching the outcome of Saturday’s election.
Sana Hashmi, a fellow at the Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation wrote in the Taipei Times about how New Delhi, too, has changed its position on Taiwan (“India is eyeing Taiwan’s elections,” Dec. 29 last year, page 8).
International interest in Taiwan has been piqued both on the individual level and on the official policy level.
British businessman Bob Burrage also submitted an opinion piece yesterday, commenting on the past 70 years of Taiwanese history and cross-strait relations, China’s increasingly assertive behavior in the East and South China seas, and recommending options for improving Taipei’s asymmetric warfare capabilities, wishing Taiwan the best of luck from the UK.
The point is not the caliber of the assessment. It is the breadth and reach of interest in Taiwan, a far cry from people not knowing the difference between Thailand and Taiwan.
On a more official level in the UK, former Dutch diplomat Gerrit van der Wees, who teaches the history of Taiwan and US relations with East Asia at George Mason University in the US, was commissioned by the Council on Geostrategy in the UK to write “Taiwan: The facts of history versus Beijing’s myths,” which was published on Monday and is available on the council’s Web site. The council, launched in March 2021, is, in its own words, “a reputable think tank dedicated to generating a new generation of geostrategic thinking for a more competitive age.” The title of Van der Wees’ paper tells you all you need to know about its purpose.
Finally, former member of the Tibetan parliament-in-exile, Khedroob Thondup, writes on this page an appeal to Taiwanese voters from the position of somebody painfully aware of the dangers posed by the CCP.
Lee has reason to be frustrated and indignant. She can perhaps take some succor in that things are changing for the better.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS