The recent journalist discussions with Taiwan authorities helped generate some interesting discussions and potential new pathways for positively changing the dynamics of cross-strait tensions.
There has been a pathway of greater frankness toward China, which started after the July NATO summit communique holding the Chinese regime to account for its role as the key enabler of Russian aggression in Ukraine. China took great umbrage to being called out.
During the week of Sept. 9–13, the Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) hosted 11 international journalists for a weeklong gathering to receive briefings from different Taiwan government ministries and think tanks.
This was a unique opportunity for journalists to engage deeply and broadly with Taiwanese centers of governance and influence that are not regularly accessible to non-Taiwanese journalists. It was also an opportunity for journalists to provide observations and feedback to the Taiwanese government and the different think tanks that are influential in developing Taiwanese policy.
During the week of dialogue with journalists, several real-world events occurred, which made the gravity of the journalistic engagement in Taiwan more urgent. This included the rare sailing of German warships through the Taiwan Strait to signify the European Union (EU)/North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) resolve.
In addition, the United States and the EU put out a joint statement on Taiwan that omitted the “One China” policy statement. Not including this statement is a very significant break and departure from years of routine inclusion. It was likely intended as a message that the placation of China is coming to an end.
Respectfully Transform Taiwan’s Identity
One interesting discussion was about theoretical views on how Taiwan should be titled on the world stage. The tensions of the Taiwan Strait draw from years of perception and assertion of agendas viewed through titles and symbols from times past that cloud open dialogue in the present.
One point of discussion was perhaps a name change for the country of Taiwan. Its official name, the Republic of China (ROC), causes confusion in many venues. Most recently, the magnificent youth baseball team of Taiwan played in the Little League World Series in the United States, and the American announcers caused a bit of a kerfuffle by referring to them as “Taiwan” instead of the contortion of “Chinese Taipei” created by international lawyers to mollify China.
Declaring the new country of the “Republic of Taiwan” could show distinction without implying immediate departure. A similar matter could be a new flag. Symbols matter, and the historic ROC flag can ignite images of past conflict. Honorably and respectfully retiring the old colors and transitioning to a new flag could help mend long-standing grudges and animosity with a clear delineation from the past to the present and the future. Some older generations may still have emotional attachments, but handling name and flag changes in a dignified manner can help contribute to more constructive dialogue. This also defuses the debate over the meaning of “One China,” which serendipitously was dropped in the aforementioned U.S./EU communique, a very significant diplomatic step.
