Few would deny that former minister of foreign affairs Mark Chen (陳唐山) is a member of the pro-Taiwanese independence old guard.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) would certainly agree that he is — which is why it has blacklisted him — as would independence advocates living in the US, the US government and the US Congress, which he addressed as a representative of World United Formosans for Independence.
THE ‘STATUS QUO’
It was for this reason that members of the new wave of independence advocates raised their eyebrows when Chen told US media that maintaining the cross-strait “status quo” is a way to protect the nation and that mentioning independence is a step too far.
The new wave of independence supporters believe that President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) policy of maintaining the cross-strait “status quo” was the reason for her drubbing in the recent local elections.
However, one Washington Post columnist visiting Taiwan said that everywhere he went, it seemed that everybody he met supported the “status quo,” just as Chen had.
NAMES ARE NOT ENOUGH
It goes without saying that it is entirely legitimate and reasonable to dispose of an imposed national title — if there were not a high price to pay for doing so.
However, it would be misguided to presume that simply changing the name of a country would gain that country official recognition.
The reason that Taiwan’s independent status has failed to secure it recognition as a country is purely political in nature: It has little to do with the name itself.
For 30 years, the US refused to recognize the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that had established itself in China, continuing to recognize instead the exiled government of the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, while not recognizing that the latter’s territory extended to China.
The name of the country was not a factor in deciding whether to recognize the legitimacy of a government.
However, the continuation of the “status quo” could become an important consideration of whether or not to recognize a country.
When the US abandoned the ROC in favor of establishing diplomatic relations with the PRC, then-US president Jimmy Carter expected the KMT to surrender within three or four years — perhaps seven or eight years at the most. With that, the “Taiwan problem” would have been resolved.
Over the four decades that have passed since then, the exiled ROC government has been transformed into a representative, legitimate constitutional government and, over the past 20 years, calls for the US to recognize Taiwan’s status have gradually become louder.
RECOGNITION
That Taiwan’s status remains unrecognized is not the fault of Taiwan: It is because the US and the international community have capitulated to China.
With the long-term maintenance of the “status quo,” coupled with China’s refusal to act in accordance with international norms and its hegemonic ambitions, the time is now ripe for the US to re-examine when would be the appropriate time to recognize Taiwan’s national status.
For 40 years now, the US has failed to officially recognize a political entity that legally belongs to no other country and which has consistently maintained an independent existence. That, my friends, is a step too far.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
After the coup in Burma in 2021, the country’s decades-long armed conflict escalated into a full-scale war. On one side was the Burmese army; large, well-equipped, and funded by China, supported with weapons, including airplanes and helicopters from China and Russia. On the other side were the pro-democracy forces, composed of countless small ethnic resistance armies. The military junta cut off electricity, phone and cell service, and the Internet in most of the country, leaving resistance forces isolated from the outside world and making it difficult for the various armies to coordinate with one another. Despite being severely outnumbered and
RSS