In a surprising but encouraging turn of events, the Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced on Thursday that it will not accept the demand of Beijing to exclude the designation of "Taiwan" as the birthplace on the passports of any of its passport holders and to use the designation "China." The announcement came as a surprise because Beijing said that Canada will follow China in this regard, a fact which was confirmed by a spokesperson of the Canadian Passport Office only last week.
What prompted this sudden and abrupt change of attitude by Canada? In all likelihood, this had much to do with lobbying, protest and a letter-writing campaign to legislators by Canada's Taiwanese, Hong Kong and Macau immigrant communities. (China had imposed a similar restriction on the designation of "Hong Kong" and "Macau" as birthplaces on passport).
In the US, the Taiwanese community has gone through the same ordeal. As a result of intensive lobbying and protests by communities, the annual State Department Authorization Bill passed in 1994 includes a provision that allows for the designation of "Taiwan" as birthplace on passports. Since members of the US Senate and House of Representatives are generally sympathetic to the predicament of Taiwan, the likelihood of any amendment to this provision as a result of Chinese pressure is very slim.
Indeed, why should any self-respecting country roll over to such unreasonable demands? Matters concerning the issuance of passports and visas are entirely within the sovereign powers of each country. No other country has the right to meddle in them. Any country that allows such meddling by another country not only is acting disgracefully, but have in fact betrayed the trust of its people.
Moreover, if China refuses to issue visas to holders of passports that fail to comply with its requirement on birthplace designation, it would constitute a discrimination on the order of refusing someone to enter its borders on the basis of sex, religion, age and so on. Of course, China probably couldn't care less, since it has never even bothered to pretend to have any regard for human rights, as demonstrated by the recent controversy over the national security bill in Hong Kong.
While China has tried to use similar tactics before, it had acted mostly on an ad hoc basis with other countries. But things were different this time. On Wednesday, China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs openly conceded that it has asked countries of the world to comply with its request, as if China was declaring an open war on the appearance of the word "Taiwan" in any way or capacity that might suggest it is not a Chinese province.
In all likelihood, the move was made in retaliation to the fact that Taiwan will begin to issue passports with the word "Taiwan" appearing on the cover starting in September.
One thing Beijing did not expect though is that, although it may have gotten away with this demand in the past when it was acting on a case-by-case basis bilaterally, once the demand is made in a collective and high-profile manner, the targets of its demand have to worry about things that probably and rightfully never crossed the authoritarian Beijing's mind as potential problems, such as popular will.
Therefore, it is important for the Taiwan government to realize that while it may be no match for the power of China, there is one thing that not even China can defeat and that is its citizenry and Chinese people across the world.
In the long run, this will certainly work to the advantage of Taiwan. In order to win over the popular will abroad, even more efforts must be made to increase Taiwan's visibility and promote Taiwan's cause.
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