Students want nation's name changed

By Debby Wu

STAFF REPORTER

The Parents Society of Overseas Students yesterday called for the nation's name to be changed from the Republic of China to Taiwan to distinguish it from China.

At a press conference yesterday, Taiwanese overseas students related their experiences abroad of foreigners confusing the People's Republic of China with the Republic of China. When the students told their friends they were from Taiwan, however, everyone would understand clearly where they were from, the students said.

"When I first went to Canada, I was asked by customs where I was from and I said ROC. The customs [officer] was suspicious and detained me for a while. Then I said I was from Taiwan and they immediately let me pass," said Michael Chiang, a student from the University of Saskatchewan.

Chiang also showed his registration certificate, which was not only misspelled but also said that he was from "the country of Tiawan, (Province of China)." He said he was angry when he saw that and protested to the university.

Way Chiu, who is serving in the army and has studied in Singapore, Australia and the US, said that for foreigners the difference between Taiwan and China was clear.

"For foreigners the issue is simple: China is China, and Taiwan is Taiwan. For me it is also like that. Mainland China is too far away for me to identify with. I much more closely identify with Houlung Creek [in Miaoli County] behind my home than with the Yangtze River or the Yellow River," Chiu said.

Meanwhile, some are calling for Taiwan to become a part of the US.

Richard Hartzell, an American who promotes human rights in Taiwan, said that according to his research, Taiwan could be regarded as an unincorporated part of US territory. He said that after Japan surrendered in World War II, it signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty with the US under which it relinquished control of Taiwan and Penghu.

Hartzell said that because the treaty said nothing about who was to take over control of Taiwan and Penghu it could be assumed that Japan had ceded them to the US, which had liberated them. Hartzell said he was hoping that he could get people to sign his petition to have the US Congress hold a hearing on Taiwan's status.

David Chou, chairman of the 51st Club, is pressing for the question of whether Taiwan should become the 51st state of US to be posed in a referendum.

"When Taiwan decides on its future, US interests have to be taken into consideration otherwise it would not be viable," Chou said.

Chou said this was because the Taiwan Relations Act confirmed the position of the US as the protector and guardian of Taiwan and its people. It is not possible for the US to disregard its interests in Taiwan, so Taiwan has to have US interests in mind when making important decisions, he said.

New passport internationally correct

After many years of controversy, Taiwan on Monday finally started issuing passports with the word "Taiwan" on the cover. The government's primary goal behind this move is to clearly tell the international community that the passport-holder comes from a high-income, democratic nation -- not from the People's Republic of China, for which Taiwan has long been mistaken. The old version of the passport only has "Republic of China" on the cover -- a name too close to "People's Republic of China." It is no wonder that immigration officers in many countries could not figure out the true origin of the passport-holders. This has resulted in countless problems for Taiwanese people traveling abroad.

However, this wise and reasonable act has long been blindly boycotted by politicians bent on the Great China ideology. It has also come under fire from the pro-unification media, which keep on saying that adding "Taiwan" to passports will raise Beijing's ire and incur retaliatory action. As a result, the process has been jeopardized and frustrated on many occasions. Only now, under the DPP administration, have we completed a process that helps the international community distinguish Taiwanese passports from Chinese ones.

Of course, passports are in the first place an indicator of sovereignty. The government has stated that the ROC's effective jurisdiction covers only Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, which are represented by "Taiwan." This is in accordance with history as well as the reality. There is nothing sneaky about it. Being residents of Taiwan, we must understand that the KMT's long-running claim that the ROC's territory includes Taiwan is a blatant lie. The ROC Constitution promulgated by Chiang Kai-shek in Nanjing on January 1, 1947, does not state what areas the country's territory includes. Besides, Taiwan never sent any representatives to participate in the amending of that constitution. The imposition of this constitution on Taiwan was simply the result of the Chiang regime's despotic rule. This constitution has nothing to do with Taiwan and its people.

We need to take a look back at the earlier basis of that constitution, namely the 1936 draft constitution written by the KMT according to Sun Yat-sen's ideas. That version of the constitution clearly stipulated the ROC's territory. It included Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Mongolia and Tibet, for example, but not Taiwan, which was a Japanese colony at the time.

The best explanation of Taiwan's status is to be found in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, which clearly shows that Taiwan does not belong to China, Japan or any other country. In other words, Taiwan's status remains undetermined.

In light of this, former president Lee Teng-hui was correct to claim that the ROC no longer exists. The ROC as defined by that 1936 draft constitution disappeared into the dust of history just like all other Chinese dynasties. The claim that Taiwan belongs to China is a myth created by the KMT government after losing the Chinese Civil War to the Communists and beating a retreat to Taiwan. There is no official document whatsoever to prove this claim.

In light of this, using "Taiwan" to represent Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu is compatible with the nation's status and the international community's understanding. All countries that employ reason and the rule of law should welcome this pragmatic move by the Taiwan government instead of dancing to Beijing's tune.

The political situation is unstable and dangerous

By Chiou Chwei-liang

The unsuccessful military coup that occurred in the Philippines in July has once again highlighted the difficulty of consolidating democratization. Many countries have become democratized in the last half of the 20th century, but there are also new democratized countries, particularly in South America, Africa and Asia, where military coups have happened repeatedly and authoritarian regimes have been restored.

In Asia, military coups and authoritarianism still cast a shadow over some countries like the Philippines, Indonesia, Myanmar and Pakistan, making their political situations unstable.

Former president Lee Teng-hui came to power after the death of late president Chiang Ching-kuo in 1988. When former premier Hau Pei-tsun, who has an impressive military background, was relieved from office in 1993, Lee said that "it is most dangerous when the snow thaws" and that Taiwan could have a military coup at any moment. The electoral victory of President Chen Shui-bian in 2000 ended 50 years of one-party rule by the KMT. In a culture of long-term "political correctness" that stressed the party, country and military as one entity, Chen sensed a possible perilous situation that could trigger a military coup, and therefore took a series of actions to please military leaders.

With regard to the recent military mutiny in the Philippines, people find it comforting to hear the pan-blue camp, scholars and experts all agree that it is impossible, at this time, for the same thing to happen in Taiwan. This is despite the political situation in Taiwan still being unstable due to serious contention between the pan-blue and pan-green camps, and although the nationalization of the armed forces has not been fully completed.

I agree with this view, but the crisis of Taiwan's recognition as a country still has not been eliminated, unfortunately. The restoration of authoritarianism through a military coup may have become a thing of the past, but the shadow of the restoration of the KMT government still lingers on.

This shadow will become more apparent in next year's presidential election, when Taiwan could possibly return to the danger zone of becoming a subjugated country once again. It is not a sensationalistic point of view but a reality.

First, KMT Chairman Lien Chan is proud to be "Chinese," unequivocally supporting a return to the 1992 "one China" consensus. PFP Chairman James Soong also advocated the "one-China roof," under which Taiwan will permanently become a part of China. The unification position of both Lien and Soong on "one China" is diametrically opposite to and incompatible with Lee's "special state-to-state relations" dictum and Chen's "one country on each side" dictum that advocates Taiwan's autonomy and independence.

Second, the stated objective of a Lien-Soong ticket is to return to the era of Chiang. Before his father passed away, Chiang presided over the White Terror with his hands covered in blood. After his father died, Chiang grasped control of the party, government and armed forces. Although he later advocated economic and political reforms to go with the trend of the time, the White Terror still persisted and the Kaohsiung Incident took place in 1979.

Until his death, Chiang was an authoritarian leader, a "soft authoritarian" figure as described by a professor from Columbia University. It would be a restoration of authoritarianism if Lien and Soong want Taiwanese people to rebel against Lee and return to the Chiang era.

Chiou Chwei-liang is a visiting professor at the Graduate Institute of Southeast Asia Studies, Tamkang University.