I write in response to Lee Long-hwa's letters regarding the CNOOC bid for Unocal and China's "LCD economics" (Letters, July 23 and July 25, page 8).
These letters have been written from an extreme pro-US, anti-Chinese point of view. The truth is rarely pure and certainly never simple, and in international affairs all countries act primarily out of economic self-interest.
Yes, Chinese workers are exploited, paid appalling wages and have few rights in comparison to developed countries, but this needs to be placed in the context of how the global economy works.
Many countries, including Taiwan, have been through a similar process of mass production for Western markets that involved low wages, limited rights and less-than-desirable working conditions. The quality of Taiwanese products was the butt of many jokes around the world, but without this I doubt Taiwan would have achieved the economic miracle it so impressively and deservedly has.
Indeed, why are so many countries forced to do this to make enough money to achieve even a fraction of the quality of life most of us in the West take for granted?
The irony of Lee's comments that the comfort of those in Beijing and Shanghai is built on the torment of the millions of China's working poor is monumental.
The "fundamentally improving living conditions in the developed world" themselves are enjoyed at the expense of billions living in poverty around the world.
While Lee complains that China is not playing fair, and many US factory workers will lose their jobs, has he ever thought of the West's current control and manipulation of global trade, itself established through decades of exploitation using deplorable methods such as slavery, that has kept places like Africa in crushing poverty?
When exporting to rich countries, poor countries pay tariffs four times higher than those paid by producers in other rich countries.
Conversely, the US government pays its farmers US$1 billion a year to over-produce rice and dump the surplus at rock-bottom prices in poor countries. This isn't just about a few jobs in Texas; it's millions of people's lives that are at stake.
Despite the visible effects and almost unanimous agreement among the scientific community that global warming is now a reality and poses arguably the single biggest threat to the world, US President George W. Bush refused to sign up to the Kyoto protocol on the basis that it would be bad for the US economy -- which is responsible for 25 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions.
Lee lambasts the French for not standing up against Beijing, but the US has just signed a pact with China on an "alternative" to Kyoto which lets them set their goals for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions individually -- with no enforcement mechanism.
This legitimizes the Chinese government as a trusted partner in issues of such importance, a sacrifice the US is manifestly prepared to make to counter growing criticism on global warming by having the world's most populous nation on its side, but without it actually committing to anything.
There are two sides to every story. But more importantly, if this world desperately needs a united global voice as Lee calls for, it is not for the sake of perpetuating living standards in developed countries such as the US, but for eradicating mass poverty and tackling global warming.
We are all responsible for the consumer choices we make and for the epidemic of blissful ignorance in the West over the stranglehold that our politicians have over the poor to keep us comparatively rich. Buy a Hummer SUV, melt another ice cap.
Enjoy the quality of life you deserve from your honest, hard work while thousands in Niger starve tonight. Think about it.
Philip Wallbridge
United Kingdom
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective
RSS