The campaign to change the nation’s time zone to that of Japan and South Korea is simply a new chapter in the pettiness and shortsightedness of certain elements of society.
China should be seen as the petty one, as it blocks Taiwan’s attempts to assert itself internationally and launches hostile rhetoric to undermine its sovereignty.
Suggesting something as pointless as changing time zones just to disassociate Taiwan from China not only has zero benefits, but brings the nation to China’s level.
At least China’s moves, while seemingly childish at times, actually affect Taiwan and how it is treated internationally.
This unlikely time zone debacle will have no effect on Beijing and will likely be laughed off by Chinese officials.
If anything, it will drive the wedge between Taiwan’s opposing political factions deeper at a time when the pan-blue and pan-green camps are already prone to petty squabbles over ideology instead of seriously looking at what is best for the nation.
Not only would the move be purely symbolic and have no direct benefits, but it is already wasting public resources, because the National Development Council, the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Ministry of the Interior will have to hold a meeting — tentatively set for tomorrow — to discuss who should be responsible for the issue, since the petition received enough signatures online.
If people have so much time, why do they not think of concrete ways to improve Taiwan to make it better able to compete against their unfriendly neighbor?
China can afford to be petty because it already has strength and wealth. Taiwanese need to stop squabbling and ramp up their game.
Many similar controversial issues do make sense on some level. Banning the Chinese flag or reducing the amount of Chinese history in textbooks are one thing, as they reinforce Taiwanese identity and pride — something the nation desperately needs. Time zones, on the other hand, are not unique to China and is going too far out on a limb.
Being in the same time zone does not indicate that two nations have a “superior-subordinate relationship.”
What about the other countries in the time zone, such as the Philippines and Australia? The logic is flawed, and no matter how much someone supports Taiwanese independence, this notion is simply nonsense.
The petition also argued that Taiwan once shared the same time zone with Japan — but that is because Taiwan was part of the Japanese Empire under colonial rule. Being ruled by any foreign power as second-class citizens should never be something to reminisce upon — including the Martial Law era. To make this argument is an insult to the very independence these petitioners are trying to promote.
China is a threat, but at least it has yet to take over Taiwan, set up headquarters in Taipei and start telling people what to do as the Japanese did. Another deeply flawed argument.
Furthermore, the logistics of the proposal — such as flight schedules and so on — would be a nightmare.
Stop wasting time on such petty ideas and think about how to make Taiwan a stronger and better nation. Otherwise, it might lose its treasured de facto independence before we even realize it.
The 75th anniversary summit of NATO was held in Washington from Tuesday to Thursday last week. Its main focus was the reinvigoration and revitalization of NATO, along with its expansion. The shadow of domestic electoral politics could not be avoided. The focus was on whether US President Biden would deliver his speech at the NATO summit cogently. Biden’s fitness to run in the next US presidential election in November was under assessment. NATO is acquiring more coherence and teeth. These were perhaps more evident than Biden’s future. The link to the Biden candidacy is critical for NATO. If Biden loses
Shortly after Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) stepped down as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012, his successor, Xi Jinping (習近平), articulated the “Chinese Dream,” which aims to rejuvenate the nation and restore its historical glory. While defense analysts and media often focus on China’s potential conflict with Taiwan, achieving “rejuvenation” would require Beijing to engage in at least six different conflicts with at least eight countries. These include territories ranging from the South China Sea and East China Sea to Inner Asia, the Himalayas and lands lost to Russia. Conflicts would involve Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia,
The Sino-Indian border dispute remains one of the most complex and enduring border issues in the world. Unlike China’s borders with Russia and Vietnam, which have seen conflicts, but eventually led to settled agreements, the border with India, particularly the region of Arunachal Pradesh, remains a point of contention. This op-ed explores the historical and geopolitical nuances that contribute to this unresolved border dispute. The crux of the Sino-Indian border dispute lies in the differing interpretations of historical boundaries. The McMahon Line, established by the 1914 Simla Convention, was accepted by British India and Tibet, but never recognized by China, which
In a recent interview with the Malaysian Chinese-language newspaper Sin Chew Daily, former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) called President William Lai (賴清德) “naive.” As always with Ma, one must first deconstruct what he is saying to fully understand the parallel universe he insists on defending. Who is being “naive,” Lai or Ma? The quickest way is to confront Ma with a series of pointed questions that force him to take clear stands on the complex issues involved and prevent him from his usual ramblings. Regarding China and Taiwan, the media should first begin with questions like these: “Did the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)