Although news reports have been dominated by lawmakers’ scheduled review of the qualifications of Control Yuan member nominees and an ensuing vote at the Legislative Yuan this week, two more important issues await their consideration during the extraordinary session: changing the cover of the nation’s passport and adding “Taiwan” motifs to the fuselages of China Airlines (CAL) aircraft.
The motions for the changes have an interesting parallel with the nation’s previous efforts to update the cover of the passport by adding the word “Taiwan” in 2003, in that they were both prompted by a pandemic originating in China — SARS in 2003 and COVID-19 this year.
In both cases, the proposals reflect the desire of Taiwanese to be distinguished from Chinese, as anti-China sentiment swelled worldwide amid the outbreaks.
That desire was bolstered after photographs emerged showing batches of masks Taiwan had shipped overseas wrapped in banners reading “China Airlines,” leading to the misunderstanding that they were sent by Beijing, defeating the purpose of Taiwan’s so-called “pandemic diplomacy.”
While opposition parties have said that they are open to discussing the issues, problems and challenges loom over the proposals.
The Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) proposal regarding the passport cover states that the word “Taiwan” should be featured on the cover using the Latin alphabet and Chinese.
However, as the administration of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in 2003 had already added the word “Taiwan” to the cover, the DPP’s proposal would only serve to add the Chinese characters, which would not be much help when it comes to distinguishing the nation from China in the international arena, as most of the world’s population cannot read Chinese.
There is also the question of whether the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) emblem, featured prominently on the cover, should be removed almost three decades after the KMT’s party-state rule ended with the dissolution of the National Assembly.
If the DPP, which has a legislative majority, does not want to be so bold as to abolish the current version of the passport, it should at least design a new cover — one that features “Taiwan,” complete with Chinese characters and a symbol that represents the nation.
This would put the issue of passport “name rectification” to bed, and the government can decide in a few years how it would go from there by gauging public opinion.
The same goes for highlighting “Taiwan” on China Airlines aircraft. To make for a meaningful change, the words “China Airlines” should be removed, and Taiwanese motifs should be introduced in their place.
Lawmakers should consider the potential fallout and work out a long-term solution that ensures the nation’s air rights after the words “China Airlines” are removed from the airplanes. Former China Airlines pilot Chen Hsiang-lin (陳祥麟) in an op-ed published in May by the Chinese-language news site The Reporter warned of the consequences of such a move.
In September 2003, to coincide with the new design of the passport cover, the Chen Shui-bian administration painted the words “Taiwan — Touch Your Heart” on the fuselage of a China Airlines airplane.
The plane was scheduled to make its maiden flight to Japan, but due to political pressure from Beijing, several airports around the world removed the aircraft’s tail number from their flight registration data, essentially denying it permission to land, Chen Hsiang-lin said, adding that the plane never left the hangar before China Airlines repainted its fuselage back to its standard decoration.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS