It's hard to understand the logic and attitudes behind the argument that this nation's passports should only bear the words "Republic of China" (ROC) but not "Taiwan." It is beyond doubt that people living in Taiwan are different from those living in the PRC.
If the legislature or the opposition parties continue to claim that the ROC's territory includes China, this will certainly be an international joke. If they are really following the doctrine of the late president Chiang Ching-kuo (
Many Taiwanese traveling abroad have been mistaken for PRC citizens when they show their ROC passports. The government certainly needs to print the word "Taiwan" on passports in order to prevent such confusion, as well as the unnecessary trouble that ensues. This is also what the international community expects. Why should the Ministry of Foreign Affairs continue to hesitate over the matter?
The fact that some ministry officials continue to drag their feet on the matter reflects the fears they are harboring toward independence. They fear that by putting "Taiwan" on the passports they may be replacing "ROC" with "Taiwan" as the name of the country, and cause Taiwan to become "independent." Beijing may react strongly to this by sending out its military forces to attack Taiwan or its outlying islands. Is it going to be that serious? The government has the responsibility to make its citizens clearly distinguishable from PRC citizens in the eyes of the international community, and the passport is a good official instrument for doing this. Fears about a possible Chinese attack over this are far-fetched.
Remember the missile crisis of March 1996? Taiwan got through the incident intact, didn't it? So why worry so much about Beijing's response? The government should do what it must to safeguard the interests of its people, even if that means military risks. It can't take its cues from Beijing.
Beijing has never given up its authoritarian habits. It has never been willing to face up to reality. Decisions are always made by a handful of top cadres who have no concern whatsoever for the fact that sovereign power rests in the hands of the people. For Taiwan to try to communicate with them would be like trying to entertain an ox with a harp. Beijing's recent actions at the World Health Organization and the WTO show that Beijing has always viewed Taiwan as an enemy. It has invariably opposed anything that benefits Taiwan. So why should we care about the likes and dislikes of Beijing?
On the other hand, didn't the KMT advocate Taiwan as an independent sovereign state when it was in power? How come it has begun to echo the PFP's "one China" dictum since losing power? Does the KMT think it is worthwhile to pressure the government to accept the "one country, two systems" model just to win back power? Hasn't anyone learned a lesson from Hong Kong's painful experience?
The government should implement policies that are supported by public opinion. Surveys conducted by the foreign ministry show that more than 50 percent of the public supports putting the word "Taiwan" on the nation's passports. There's no reason for the government to keep wringing its hands over this issue. It should show some determination and do what is right for the people of this nation.
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
Following the BRICS summit held in Kazan, Russia, last month, media outlets circulated familiar narratives about Russia and China’s plans to dethrone the US dollar and build a BRICS-led global order. Each summit brings renewed buzz about a BRICS cross-border payment system designed to replace the SWIFT payment system, allowing members to trade without using US dollars. Articles often highlight the appeal of this concept to BRICS members — bypassing sanctions, reducing US dollar dependence and escaping US influence. They say that, if widely adopted, the US dollar could lose its global currency status. However, none of these articles provide
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with
RSS