Kerry must be clear
It is somewhat depressing to read US Senator John Kerry's opinions regarding Taiwan's proposed referendum ("Bush failed Taiwan: Lieberman," Jan. 8, page 1). A Massachusetts resident and former Kerry intern myself, I have met the senator on more than one occasion and was impressed by his articulation and deep understanding of domestic and foreign issues. However, since having read this article, I have begun to reconsider my support for him in the upcoming Massachusetts Democratic primary.
I congratulate Senator Joe Lieberman on his support for Taiwan, stating that the US must stand and unite on com-mon principles of democracy and freedom, despite China's overwhelming presence, and approve the right of the Taiwanese to hold national polls on issues regarding their national security. After all, would you feel safe if there were 500 ballistic missiles aimed at you? That is exactly what Taiwan is protesting and the defensive referendum is in no way an attempt by President Chen Shui-bian (
Is Kerry really condoning the failure of a "one China" policy that has become so evident in Hong Kong? Does he actually think that Taiwan can continue the push towards the democracy he praised under a one-party system that he says the US must continue to adhere to?
This position by Kerry knocked the wind out of me. I found it difficult to believe that an experienced and decorated war veteran like himself under-estimates the real threat escala-ting in the Taiwan Strait and cannot recognize the importance of Taiwan that his mentor, the late US president John F. Kennedy, understood. Yes, times change and people change, but the threat posed by China's regime has not.
Though Kerry is bright and well-educated, and I have a great deal of respect for the majority of his priorities, it is far more refreshing to see Howard Dean and Senator John Edwards have expressed on behalf of the country in which I have been residing for the past two years, and their declaration that a defensive referendum is what Taiwan wants and needs, and that they will respect whatever outcome is reached in this March 20 milestone.
Kerry is right to acknowl-edge that Taiwan is a true demo-cracy and that the country must never slip back into martial law or be subject to invasion. But for him to add that the "one China" policy is right and that the US would consider any declaration of independence unacceptable just adds further ambiguity to an already imperfect China-Taiwan-US imbalance.
Kerry should clarify his position to his constituents because, at the moment, it appears as though he will stand by Taiwan, but, given his contradictory statements, who can really be sure? This would be the best way to win back admirers, such as myself.
Geoff Merrill
Taipei
Spotlight China's tyranny
The US, through State Depart-ment spokesman Richard Boucher, voiced support for more democracy in Hong Kong after Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
The regime that fears words must be insecure, and must have something to fear. China's fear of democracy, or even talking about democracy, is merely the reflection of the weakness in its system of government.
The US, all democratic na-tions and all people who believe in democracy should continue to talk loudly about the tyranny in China, about the ruthless government, about the executions, the repression, the human rights violations, the suppression of religions, the eugenics policy in Tibet, the imperialistic aggression towards and disregard of human rights in Taiwan, the suppression of freedom of speech, freedom of belief, freedom of the press and the long, long list of other freedoms that China lacks.
Bringing outside influences and information to China will lead to its ultimate reformation. While we loathe it, we must embrace it. While we criticize it, we must enlighten it. While we shun it, we must befriend it. Kudos to Boucher for telling it like it is. Now let's hear something about the thriving democracy in Taiwan, and how the rest of the world must prevent China from putting its dictatorial paws on this shining example of free enterprise and freedom.
Lee Long-hwa
United States
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
There is an old saying that if there is blood in the water, the sharks will come. In Taiwan’s case, that shark is China, circling, waiting for any sign of weakness to strike. Many thought the failed recall effort was that blood in the water, a signal for Beijing to press harder, but Taiwan’s democracy has just proven that China is mistaken. The recent recall campaign against 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, many with openly pro-Beijing leanings, failed at the ballot box. While the challenge targeted opposition lawmakers rather than President William Lai (賴清德) himself, it became an indirect
A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to