The name of a nation is a symbol of that nation, which is why every nation exerts great effort to find a representative name.
Some nations, however, have chosen both long and cumbersome names, which is the reason why the international community simply uses the geographic part of the name to designate such nations. "Venezuela" is short for the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, "Guyana" for the Co-operative Republic of Guyana, or "Brazil" for the Federative Republic of Brazil. Of course, the names of some nations with already short names get further abbreviated, like "Peru" for the Republic of Peru. The Japanese name for its nation is "State of Japan," three characters in Japanese (日本國), but when taking an English name, the Japanese themselves abbreviated it to only one word, "Japan."
Regardless of a nation's domestic political situation, the most common addition to national names throughout the world is the word "Republic." Even if the common word "Republic" is the only addition to a geographical name, making it very easy to pronounce, the international community still finds it too long and cumbersome and only uses the geographical name. Sometimes these names are geographical names that have become national names, and sometimes it is the other way around.
Many nations have used a single word as the name of their nation from the day they were founded. Not only does this make it easy for them to pronounce the name of their own nation, but it also provides them with a high level of international name recognition. India and Malaysia are two examples of a total of 23 nations around the world that have adopted this approach.
There was almost immediate controversy over the union of states known as "Serbia and Montenegro" because it is unabbreviateable and therefore quite unwieldy for writers and governments. What if the disputed territory "South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands" were to become independent by some twist of fate? Such an island-state would have the world's longest name.
Some countries call themselves republics, but are actually dictatorships, such as the Republic of Iraq. Leaving out the word "Republic" from the national name, simply using a geographical name, does not harm national dignity, which is well exemplified by such proud nations as Canada, Singapore, Australia and Ireland.
Even though the question of a nation's name is a solemn and serious issue, there is nothing shameful in changing the name of a nation. Ceylon, for example, changed its name to Sri Lanka, and Burma changed its to Myanmar. Mongolia has changed its name from Greater Mongolia to the People's Republic of Mongolia, before, in 1992, becoming Mongolia.
"China" is used as the abbreviation of both the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC), while both sides reject the idea of two Chinas, saying that there is only one. Suppose that we could advance to the point where the idea of "two Chinas" becomes acceptable to both sides. Which of the " two China" would be larger? The ROC today still includes Mongolia in its territory! The fact that both the PRC and the ROC are called China in English corroborates the fact that there is only one China. The former has a people, the latter doesn't, ie, the ROC is a peopleless China.
So how should we deal with the Chinese republic on Taiwan? The ROC on Taiwan, the Republic of China on Taiwan, the ROC (Taiwan), or Taiwan ROC? There are in fact quite a few different names that would be appropriate for Taiwan. Why not the "Republic of Taiwan?" Or just "Taiwan?"
Ng Chiau-tong is chairman of World United Formosans for Independence (WUFI).
Translated by Perry Svensson
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS