Taiwan-Canada relations
It was shocking to read Canadian International Minister of Trade Mary Ng quoted in Saturday’s Taipei Times article “Trade office disappointed over ‘delay’ in CPTPP [Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership] bid” saying that Canada’s “one China” policy had not changed.
It appears that this “policy” — if it ever existed — has been superseded by the Nov. 6 motion in the Canadian House of Commons that carried unanimously (which even government Liberal MPs voted in favor of) that UN Resolution 2758 did not establish People’s Republic of China (PRC) sovereignty over Taiwan, as reported in the Taipei Times article “Canada House passes motion on UN Resolution 2758” on Nov. 7.
Moreover, when Canada first recognized the PRC, it never agreed to recognize its “one China” claim that Taiwan was part of it, simply stating that it “takes note of the PRC ‘one China’ position.”
Despite assumptions in Ottawa of a “one China” policy, this simply is not the case, and such rumors should not impede Canada from vigorously supporting Taiwan’s entry into the CPTPP.
Please also note that this illusion of Canada’s “one China” policy has been used to block a Taiwan-Canada social security agreement (SSA).
The lack of a SSA has greatly harmed the livelihood of thousands of senior Canadians living in Taiwan and senior Taiwanese-Canadians in Canada who fall short of qualifying for the Canadian Old Age Security (OAS).
The SSA is an agreement that would enable Canadian expats to count local residence as “Canada time.”
That is important since expat Canadians need 20 years of “Canadian residence past 18 years of age” to qualify for the OAS. That allows Canadians in 90-plus nations to top up their lack of “Canada time” with local residence time.
Furthermore, senior Taiwanese-Canadians who immigrated with their families to Canada and reside there only require 10 years of Canadian residence, like all citizens, to qualify for the OAS. However, due to a lack of agreement between Taiwan and Canada, they cannot count their Taiwan residence as “Canada time” and often live their final years in poverty.
Ng should study the facts and use a bit of humanity instead of obeying the Chinese Communist Party’s party line.
Curtis Smith
Taipei
Chinese Taipei
The debate over the “Chinese Taipei” name has resurfaced because of recent international competitions. While many people are unhappy with this name, I believe we should focus on supporting the athletes’ choices, rather than letting political goals decide their performance.
Athletes have a short window of opportunity to shine, especially athletes like badminton players Chou Tien-chen (周天成) and Tai Tzu-ying (戴資穎), who chose to continue competing under Chinese Taipei during the Olympic referendum to ensure they can compete internationally. Future stars or not, they should not have their careers be hindered by politics.
These Taiwanese athletes, although they compete under the name Chinese Taipei, are internationally recognized as representing Taiwan. Their outstanding performances have brought more attention to Taiwan on the global stage.
However, if Taiwanese overly emphasize political name changes, it could lead to the nation being banned or excluded from international competitions. Thus, Taiwan would not only be unable to showcase its strength in these events, but might also lose the opportunity to have it seen by the world.
Is this not a case of putting the cart before the horse? Are we unknowingly missing the valuable chance to promote Taiwan?
The nation should give athletes more opportunities to excel internationally, not lose them because of a name issue.
Chang Chia-yen
Hsinchu City
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,