DPP ad offends the world
As a visitor to Taiwan -- and not from the US -- I applaud Martin Lawson's response to Alfred Tsai's letter regarding the ongoing DPP debacle ("Letters," July 19, page 8).
While there is no question that the US is heavy-handed at times in asserting its super-power status, the outcry over the DPP's poor judgement in including Hitler as part of its advertising campaign has not emerged solely from the US. There has been a universal outcry over this matter because Taiwan is considered part of the global community. This is a community which, in part, is unified over basic moral issues, recognition of the atrocities of the past and the need to be sensitive to those who suffered under extreme persecution.
As such, the DPP controversy transcends the simple matter of freedom of speech. Rather, it is an issue which prompts the rest of the world to wonder whether Taiwan's democratically elected government has the good judgement and the awareness of historical contexts necessary to participate as a democratic nation on the world stage.
Christopher Allan
Taipei
Abraham H. Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League, was right when he said, "This controversy highlights the continuing need for Holocaust education in Taiwan."
Hitler was one of the 20th century's most monstrous figures, but that didn't discourage Taiwan from using his image in a commercial. In the era of globalization, Taiwan's localiza-tion-centered insensitivity is potentially damaging. Most people paid little attention to the controversy. When asked whether anything struck them about the commercial, some people in southern Taiwan just shrugged. The DPP said they didn't think the ad would offend the people of Taiwan.
Sadly, I think they were right!
Julian Wang
Chiayi
Unification under the gun
Whenever a gun is pointed at the people of Taiwan and words like "unification or war" are uttered, the unification alluded to is a forced one; it is a crime.
Any poll concerning unification or "one country, two systems" ("One China is just a Mirage," July 20, page 13)
conducted either officially or privately in Taiwan must give two options for unification: one for unification accompanied by renunciation of the use of force against Taiwan as its impetus; and one unification without the threat or use of violence.
It is clear that the people of Taiwan have never been taxed by the communist Chinese government. They supported them-selves on this island for at least 300 years before the Chinese Communist Party even came into existence.
"Two systems" already exists. In practical terms, the people of Taiwan don't need "one country." But if the Chinese communists decided to give up any threat to Taiwan, the people would give due consideration to overtures from a civilized government. Only then would any polls -- conducted beyond an atmosphere of fear -- be worth referring to, both in psychological and statistical terms.
Kuojung Ni
Hsinchu City
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry