The Athens Olympic Organizing Committee has ordered the removal of Taiwan's advertising for the Olympic Games in Athens. This is not an isolated incident, and it once again highlights the international injustices Taiwan has to endure.
The Government Information Office (GIO) proceeded cautiously when outsourcing this advertising campaign. In addition to GIO Vice Director Lee Cher-jean (
After the GIO awarded the tender, amendments to the original proposal were made at several meetings before the deal was sealed. During this process, creativity took a back seat to the effort to remain within the constraints of the regulations laid down by the Olympic Organizing Committee. In accordance with the "Olympic format," the country's team is called "Chinese Taipei," the flag and team logo feature a plum flower and the team's song is the National Flag Song.
According to the nation's agreement with the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the above Olympic format will be binding in venues for competition, training, meetings and ceremonies related to the games, in the athletes' village, in accommodations for other participants and VIPs, and on all documents, manuals, materials and broadcasting. But -- also according to the agreement -- the Olympic format is in principle not binding in places other than the venues described above.
The items that the GIO designed for the Olympics include giant billboard near the airport, pushcarts at the airport, bus ads, ad boards in the audience stands and fan items such as temporary tattoos, cheer sticks and fan hats.
In principle, not one of these things violates the so-called Olympic format, and they could all make use of the name "Taiwan" instead of the far-fetched "Chinese Taipei." To avoid any disturbances, however, the GIO, cautiously and humbly, stuck with "Chinese Taipei." Who would have expected that after that, they still would suffer such censorship?
The reason given by the Athens Olympic Organizing Committee for removing Taiwan's ads from airport push carts, buses and giant billboards was that the content did not comply with the Olympic theme. These three kinds of ads (push carts, buses, giant billboards) all show a line of athletes at the starting blocks.
The photograph is suitable, and the text reads "Chinese Taipei on the Starting Line!" Another line reads "To the Top! Chinese Taipei," yet another standard cheer. How can this not comply with the Olympic theme?
The reason for this humiliating, belittling "Olympic format" is that after China took over Taiwan's UN seat in 1971 and diplomatic relations were severed with Japan and the US, the relationships between Taiwan's Olympic Committee and most national Olympic Committees were broken off. This continued until 1981, when Taiwan signed the "Olympic format" agreement with the IOC. Regret-tably, the nation's representatives did not insist on the name "Taiwan," and instead walked into the "one China trap" by agreeing to use the name "Chinese Taipei."
It's not that the country has lacked the opportunity to use the name "Taiwan." In the 1952 Olympic Games in Helsinki, the organizers of the basketball competition demanded that our team use the name "Taiwan." The team, however, on orders from the central government, pulled out -- following the principle that "the world isn't big enough for two Chinas."
In 1954, when the IOC held its 49th annual meeting in Athens, they voted to accept two Chinese Olympic committees. In 1959, when the committee held its annual meeting in Munich, Germany, it was decided that "because the Olympic Committee located in Taipei, Taiwan, cannot control sports activities in all China, it cannot be recognized under the name the `Chinese Olympic Committee,' and it will be stricken from the list of countries recognized by the IOC. If the said Olympic Committee wants to apply for recognition under another name, the IOC will consider such an application separately."
When our national Olympic committee applied for recognition as the Republic of China Olympic Committee, the application was denied. Another application was submitted in 1960, but the IOC was of the opinion that the territory under the nation's control only encompassed the Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, and suggested that the name "Taiwan" or "Formosa" be used. Then-president Chiang Kai-shek (
Is the use of "Taiwan" really such a serious matter? After Japan's Olympic Committee used the name "Taiwan" instead of "the Republic of China" during the 1964 Tokyo Olympic Games, Taiwanese students directed by the government launched a "five noes anti-Japanese protest" -- no to Japanese movies, no to Japanese music, no to speaking Japanese, no to reading Japanese books, and no to buying Japanese goods -- showing some of the confusion and stupidity of Chiang's view of international affairs.
The fact that the nation's ads have now been removed despite the use of the name "Chinese Taipei" only further highlights the necessity for the country to achieve the status of a regular nation. To reach that goal, the first step is to correct Taiwan's title.
Cheng Tzu-leong is an advertising professor at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS