Let us first discuss the national experience of transitioning from the British Empire to the Commonwealth of Nations. During the Age of Discovery, all European maritime powers had colonies — Portugal in South Asia and South America, Spain in Southeast Asia and South America, and the British Empire in North America and Asia. When the people of Britain’s North American colonies gained independence and became a non-imperial nation-state, it influenced the independence of Britain’s other colonies.
When the US gained independence, most of its citizens were originally British colonists, in addition to indigenous Native Americans. Later, the global changes brought on by World War I and II attracted immigrants from various — mainly European — countries, thereby shaping the US into a global superpower.
Many immigrants criticize the US, but if forced to decide between the US and the countries they left, they would still choose to remain in the US. From colonization to immigration — in today’s world, the movement of nations and citizens has shifted from being forced to free choice. In the case of Taiwan and China, the citizens of the countries known as the Republic of China (ROC) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) can also choose to become citizens of other nations.
China has constantly claimed Taiwan as its own — but this claim defies the principles of historical experience. After the US gained independence from the British Empire, many of Britain’s overseas colonies were also granted independence. The monarchy is now recognized only symbolically, and the king serves only as a ceremonial head of state of the constitutional monarchy.
The UK is a civilized kingdom. Beyond the union of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the British Empire formerly included countries such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand — all of which are now independent member states of the Commonwealth of Nations. Should any of the association’s 56 member states choose to leave, it would not be an issue.
When the PRC considers Taiwan’s national status, it often forgets the humiliation it went through and now seeks to impose such humiliation on others. It never imagined the kind of new international relationships that emerged when the British Empire allowed its colonies to become independent, thereby forming close bonds among nations. Those independent nations welcomed new immigrants — including those from China — and China itself has also accepted immigrants.
The countries of today’s world are no longer defined solely by the vertical inheritance of family lineage. Now, it is people who choose their country.
In 1895, the Qing Empire ceded Taiwan to Japan, which colonized the nation for five decades. Later, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — under the name ROC — held Taiwan hostage for more than 50 years. The now-democratized Taiwan must first break free from its history of colonization. China should not collude with the KMT — a party which once controlled Taiwan under the pretext of anti-communism, but now seeks to threaten Taiwan by aligning itself with the Chinese Communist Party.
In many respects, China has already developed into a major global power, and thus should respect Taiwan’s break away from the KMT’s coercion. The two countries should develop bilateral relations based on national subjectivity. Peaceful and civil relations between Taiwan and China would earn global recognition. It is about time the PRC acted like a civilized country.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
US President Donald Trump last week told reporters that he had signed about 12 letters to US trading partners, which were set to be sent out yesterday, levying unilateral tariff rates of up to 70 percent from Aug. 1. However, Trump did not say which countries the letters would be sent to, nor did he discuss the specific tariff rates, reports said. The news of the tariff letters came as Washington and Hanoi reached a trade deal earlier last week to cut tariffs on Vietnamese exports to the US to 20 percent from 46 percent, making it the first Asian country
On Monday, Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) delivered a welcome speech at the ILA-ASIL Asia-Pacific Research Forum, addressing more than 50 international law experts from more than 20 countries. With an aim to refute the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) claim to be the successor to the 1945 Chinese government and its assertion that China acquired sovereignty over Taiwan, Lin articulated three key legal positions in his speech: First, the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration were not legally binding instruments and thus had no legal effect for territorial disposition. All determinations must be based on the San Francisco Peace
As things heated up in the Middle East in early June, some in the Pentagon resisted American involvement in the Israel-Iran war because it would divert American attention and resources from the real challenge: China. This was exactly wrong. Rather, bombing Iran was the best thing that could have happened for America’s Asia policy. When it came to dealing with the Iranian nuclear program, “all options are on the table” had become an American mantra over the past two decades. But the more often US administration officials insisted that military force was in the cards, the less anyone believed it. After
During an impromptu Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) rally on Tuesday last week to protest what the party called the unfairness of the judicial system, a young TPP supporter said that if Taiwan goes to war, he would “surrender to the [Chinese] People’s Liberation Army [PLA] with unyielding determination.” The rally was held after former Taipei deputy mayor Pong Cheng-sheng’s (彭振聲) wife took her life prior to Pong’s appearance in court to testify in the Core Pacific corruption case involving former Taipei mayor and TPP chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲). The TPP supporter said President William Lai (賴清德) was leading them to die on