A few days ago, it was nice and sunny outside, so I went to take a walk in a park. There, I overheard an elementary-school student ask: What countries do you like besides Taiwan?
The child called Taiwan by its name and said it was a country, showing that consciousness of “Taiwan is a nation” has been internalized, which delights me.
There are a few other examples of this.
As of this year, 110 countries recognize the Taiwanese passport and allow entry without a visa. Twelve of these have formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan — and welcome Taiwanese with open arms — while the rest use our country’s name, Taiwan.
They do not call it “Chinese Taipei,” “Chinese Taiwan” or “Taiwan, China.” Even the name “Republic of China” is on its way out.
Taiwan also has its own Global Trade Item Number, which is a unique number used to identify trade items and is an indicator of an exported product’s origin.
“Made in Taiwan” is a branding that has global recognition as a marker of products made with superior quality, safety and reliability.
This has also been present in the stances of our presidents: former president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) “special state-to-state international relations,” former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) “one country on each side [of the Taiwan Strait]” and President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) “neither the Republic of China [Taiwan] nor the People’s Republic of China [China] are subservient to the other.”
Tsai’s administration marks 77 years of Taiwan being its own entity and with the changes over the past 36 years, the country’s diversity, governance, economy and cultural development have undeniably made it distinct and separate from China.
During the commemoration service for the 228 Incident, Taiwan Nation Alliance (台灣國家聯盟) convener Wu Shu-min (吳樹民) said that he hopes Vice President William Lai (賴清德) would find a suitable minister of education once he is inaugurated as president — one who promotes a curriculum of historical consciousness centered on Taiwan.
Under the guidance of the president-elect, Taiwanese national consciousness would continue to be promoted, ushering Taiwan toward the normalization of the nation, Wu said.
Chen Chiao-chicy is a psychiatrist at Mackay Memorial Hospital and an adjunct professor.
Translated by Tim Smith
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS