When President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) signed two UN human rights covenants on May 14, he invited all diplomats in Taipei to the signing ceremony except for the representative from Japan to punish him for remarks on the undetermined status of Taiwan.
There is no telling what will anger Ma because even though he dislikes talk about Taiwan’s undetermined status, it is a political fact. More importantly, this status is a frequently pursued diplomatic goal of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
Assuming that the KMT really only accepted the idea that Taiwan belongs to the Republic of China (ROC), then they would have to refuse participation in every international event where they could not participate under the title of “ROC” and as a country. This has not happened.
Countries participate in the WHO as countries; observership is a non-governmental status. The KMT’s willingness to accept observer status was an affirmation of the undetermined status of Taiwan. By accepting “Chinese Taipei,” the Ma administration also appears to take the view that the nation’s title is undetermined.
However, the KMT have gone even further. When Taiwanese students studying in Geneva protested against the WHO listing Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Department of Health Minister Yeh Ching-chuan (葉金川) complained the protests would cause Taiwan to be seen as a “lowly country” and insisted that he opposed any protests. This amounted to a strong defense of Beijing’s position that Taiwan is a province of China, abandoning even the idea that Taiwan’s status is undetermined.
But in the WHO, Taiwan is not even a “lowly nation,” simply a local government. It is unbelievable that Yeh would take a seat at the World Health Assembly given this arrangement and that he would turn on Taiwanese students and defend Beijing’s view of Taiwan as a Chinese province.
Ma has shamelessly tried to divert attention from the serious conflict over whether Taiwan is a Chinese province to the issue of whether or not the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) accepts the title “Chinese Taipei.”
The KMT then blamed the DPP for Taiwan’s being listed as a Chinese province by saying that the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between China and the WHO was signed in 2005 when the DPP was in power. However, the DPP never accepted the MOU, while Ma is happy to take part in international events under these conditions.
With reference to the undetermined status of Taiwan, Ma has said that Taiwan is part of the ROC and that the sovereignty of the ROC rests with the people. These are big words, but can Ma tell us whether by “all the people” he means 23 million people or 1.4 billion people? Of course not, and that is another standard position of someone who subscribes to the view that Taiwan’s status is undetermined.
After the ROC withdrew from the UN, it was succeeded by the PRC. However, Taiwan’s status was never determined. I believe the view of the vast majority of Taiwanese is that although the title “ROC” is used in Taiwan, its status is undetermined, while “Taiwan” belongs to the Taiwanese and they do not accept the view that Taiwan’s status is undetermined.
This means that the theoretical foundation for Taiwan independence is not that its status is undetermined, but that it should be determined by its people according to the principle of self-determination.
The KMT’s stance, on the other hand, is that the status of China, the PRC, the ROC and Taiwan are all undetermined. This turns everything into a mess, that, if brought to light, would turn the KMT furious with shame.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Pat Gelsinger took the reins as Intel CEO three years ago with hopes of reviving the US industrial icon. He soon made a big mistake. Intel had a sweet deal going with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the giant manufacturer of semiconductors for other companies. TSMC would make chips that Intel designed, but could not produce and was offering deep discounts to Intel, four people with knowledge of the agreement said. Instead of nurturing the relationship, Gelsinger — who hoped to restore Intel’s own manufacturing prowess — offended TSMC by calling out Taiwan’s precarious relations with China. “You don’t want all of
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
In a recent essay in Foreign Affairs, titled “The Upside on Uncertainty in Taiwan,” Johns Hopkins University professor James B. Steinberg makes the argument that the concept of strategic ambiguity has kept a tenuous peace across the Taiwan Strait. In his piece, Steinberg is primarily countering the arguments of Tufts University professor Sulmaan Wasif Khan, who in his thought-provoking new book The Struggle for Taiwan does some excellent out-of-the-box thinking looking at US policy toward Taiwan from 1943 on, and doing some fascinating “what if?” exercises. Reading through Steinberg’s comments, and just starting to read Khan’s book, we could already sense that
RSS