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
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS