Today, Russia mourns the victims of the inhuman terrorist attack in Beslan. It is a terrible tragedy and emotional blow to every Russian citizen, and has evoked a wave of sympathy from around the world (which in this case, regrettably, did not include Taiwan). Of course, what is a tragedy to Russia is a joy to terrorists and their sympathizers. For the author of your editorial ("Address root causes of terrorism," Sept. 5, page 8) about this episode, as he or she calls the death of 335 people, nearly half of them children, is a good occasion to throw some mud at Russia, as well as to arrogantly judge it and provide unsolicited advice.
This article creates the impression that, although the terrorists are wrong, the Russian government should ultimately be held responsible for the tragedy, or at least share some responsibility with the terrorists. I wonder if the author uses the same logic to describe other terrorist attacks, like on Sept. 11, 2001, or if Russia is a special case conveniently providing the opportunity for an exercise in hypocrisy and double standards.
There is indeed no good solution to a situation in which 1,500 people, including many children, are taken hostage by brutal terrorists, who can not be called human, who do not even have any demands and who just want to provoke bloodshed. And to those who watched live coverage it should be absolutely clear who opened fire and why the siege began. I am unaware of any group "demanding an explanation from the Russian government," as the editorial claims. Leaders and citizens of many countries, as well as the UN, EU, NATO and other organizations, have expressed their sympathy, as well as their condemnation of terrorism.
So, some people wonder why Russia cannot just leave Chechnya alone. Well, we have tried that already. Chechnya was de facto independent from Russia from 1996 to 1999. This resulted in Chechnya becoming a bandit republic of the dark medieval kind. Just one example: at the time, there were slave markets openly operating in Grozny and other cities. Curiously, at that time we did not hear reprimands addressed to Chechen rulers from those human rights crusaders who are now accusing Russia with gusto. They were busy with some other problems, like Kosovo, saving their ammunition for bigger targets than some slave masters in Chechnya.
Finally, in 1999, Chechen bandits tried to invade the bordering republic of Dagestan to establish their caliphate. They blew up several apartment houses in Moscow and other Russian cities, killing hundreds of innocent people. That finally triggered the Russian response.
Russia is trying to restore normal life in the republic, to restore the rule of law, democracy and human rights. It is a difficult process, interrupted by frequent terrorist attacks. If Russia leaves the northern Caucasus, this region will become a kingdom of terror that would make Afghanistan under the Taliban seem like Switzerland. So, our war with terrorism should mobilize help and support from the international community. That is generally what is happening.
Even if Russia wants to start negotiation with so-called "rebels," who should we talk to? Famous terrorist and murderer Shamil Basayev? "President" Aslan Maskhadov, under whose rule Chechnya became the hotbed for international terrorism and religious extremism and who controls nothing and decides nothing?
Terrorists want to break the spirit of my nation and make it surrender. Those who read history textbooks know that Russia does not surrender.
George Zinoviev
Deputy representative,
Russian Representative Office, Taipei
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS