The inevitable came to pass on Friday when Taiwan Post Co announced plans to change its name back to Chunghwa Post Co. The corporation’s chairman, Wu Min-yu (吳民佑), said that the change was in response to a resolution adopted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in April that said the company had not completed the required legal procedures.
Saying that the original process was unlawful — the bills were stalled in the KMT-controlled legislature — was a disingenuous ploy to distract attention from the real issue of why the name was changed in the first place.
When the Democratic Progressive Party (DDP) changed Chunghwa Post to Taiwan Post in February of last year, Steve Chen (陳瑞隆), then-minister of economic affairs, made it clear that changing the titles of state-run enterprises would “help avoid confusion and increase Taiwan’s international presence.”
Other name changes included Chinese Petroleum Corp (CPC) to CPC Corp, Taiwan and China Shipbuilding Corp (CSBC) to Taiwan International Shipbuilding Corp. Although the DPP was justifiably raked over the coals at the time for its belated and half-baked attempts (though the word “China” was removed from the Chinese-language titles they were retained in some of the English-language acronyms), it was an effort to bring the names closer to reality.
It is fitting then that the current administration, which seems intent on diminishing Taiwan’s international presence, would go after Taiwan Post first because it is a clear manifestation, though mostly symbolic, of Taiwan’s status as a sovereign nation. It is only a matter of time before other state-run corporations follow suit.
Meanwhile, on the same day Wu made the announcement, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was patting himself on the back — again — over his Pyrrhic victory with China’s state-run media.
In a meeting at the Presidential Office with Australian Commerce and Industry Office in Taipei representative Stephen Waters, Ma said that China’s willingness to use Taiwan’s official title Zhonghua Taibei (中華台北, or Chinese Taipei) at the Olympics rather than Zhongguo Taibei (中國台北, or Taipei, China), represented a triumph and demonstrated the ability of both sides to work towards a “diplomatic truce.”
This is laughable. The very idea of a “diplomatic truce” implies that both sides are independent countries that use diplomacy to solve disputes. Beijing will use whatever language it needs to achieve its goals of unification and cares little for the concerns of Taiwan.
Or, for that matter, the international community.
It has become apparent in the past week that Beijing is backtracking on its earlier pledges to grant foreign accredited journalists unfettered access to the Internet during the Olympic games. So what goodwill can Ma expect from China?
Taken together with his recent statements about not following the tradition of the previous administration in using the name Taiwan in its bid to join the UN, it is clear that the current administration is turning back the clock on sovereignty under the paradoxical notion that it will somehow increase Taiwan’s visibility on the international stage.
But then again, the administration doesn’t seem as concerned about Taiwan’s diplomatic impasse as much as it cares about appeasing the dictators in Beijing.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS