The international community keeps its eyes shut to the fact that there are two distinct entities -- one Taiwan and one China -- and country on each side of the Taiwan Strait.
It is a reality that can no longer be ignored. Continuing to do so jeopardizes peace and security in Asia, which potentially involves Japan, Korea, as well as the US. Many still prefer clinging to a "one China" policy despite differing interpretations among nations.
Domestically, Taiwan desperately tries to make the distinction between Peoples' Republic of China and the Republic of China (ROC), despite the fact that the ROC ceased to exist in the minds of diplomatic communities when it was expelled from the UN in 1971.
Taiwan has experimented with terms like "ROC on Taiwan," "Taiwan is the ROC," "Taiwan equals the ROC," "Taiwan (ROC)," "Taiwan-ROC" and of late "Taiwan, ROC." But no matter what one uses, the reality remains that Taiwan is Taiwan and China is China. Two distinct governments exist.
Despite this, many unification supporters continue clinging to the use of "ROC" in the name of patriotism. They are unwilling to recognize that doing so does more harm than good to the 23 million residents of Taiwan.
At present, the ROC maintains diplomatic relations with fewer than 30 nations, or so-called nations. Even the US, one of Taiwan's staunchest allies, has switched its diplomatic ties from Taiwan to China.
In its place, the US enacted the Taiwan Relations Act. (Note that it is called the Taiwan Relations Act, and not the ROC Relations Act.)
The Taiwan Relations Act has been cited in various contexts to suit various purposes and motives. It has been characterized as everything from worthless to absolutely essential.
Certainly, the Act has its limitations, but it provides adequate protection for Taiwan from foreign invasion. Without it, Taiwan would have been ruled by a communist regime shortly after the US embassy was removed from Taiwan in 1980.
A national referendum must be held as soon as possible to immediately cease the use of the term ROC and use Taiwan instead. The first nationally elected president, Lee Teng-Hui (
To gain international acceptance, a domestic consensus must first be achieved. To begin with, the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, China Airlines and the like should be renamed to reflect Taiwan.
Popularizing the use of "Taiwan" instead of "ROC" can help distinguish Taiwan from China -- the People's Republic of China.
More importantly, much confusion could be avoided in the international scene. Citizenry around the world readily recognize these two distinctive entities. The government in Taiwan must take a firm stand on using "Taiwan" consistently, and have the perseverance to carry it out.
Wavering between "Taiwan" and "ROC" prolongs the diplomatic isolation between Taiwan and the rest of the world.
Political entities all over the world avoid "ROC" like the plague but are receptive to Taiwan. I am certain Taiwan will be admitted to far more international organizations than the ROC has been.
The Global Alliance for Democracy and Peace was established to promote the peaceful coexistence for both sides of the Strait. Taiwan has been ruled separately since 1895, when it was ceded to Japan.
For peaceful and equal status to continue, distinctive names must be used. We must insist on using "Taiwan" exclusively rather than "ROC" as a part of its name.
We agree there is only one China -- let the mainland natives have it. And let the residents of Taiwan have Taiwan.
Yu-Chong Lin, PhD
Honolulu
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS