Radical Palestinian groups and Saudi militant Osama bin Laden are among those at the top of the list of suspects for Tuesday's terrorist attacks in the US. In Palestinian territories, some people danced, tooted their horns or fired their weapons into the air in celebration after hearing of the catastrophes.
On Internet forums, one sees messages expressing pleasure at other people's disasters. Some believe the US had it coming; some are even calling on Taiwan to follow the terrorists' example and launch similar attacks on Shanghai and Beijing. The suffering inflicted by the attacks, the madness of the terrorists who carried them out and the attitudes of people who watch the events as if they are watching a good movie -- these are just some of the deplorable signs that, at the beginning of the so-called "digital era," the human soul is still deeply mired in the self-destructive idea of fighting violence with violence and resolving everything by means of force.
Both the Palestinian radicals and bin Laden have been viewed as fanatics hostile to the West. Their hatred for the US has its causes, however. Also, Afghanistan's Taliban regime has harbored bin Laden because of its long-running tensions with the US.
The Taliban regime has been rejected by the international community because of its lunatic demolition of the giant Bamiyan Buddha statues, its rigid implementation of its interpretation of Islamic law and its hostility to Western culture. These have trig-gered UN trade sanctions and seriously diminished foreign aid. On top of this, drought is also inflicting severe suffering on people across the country. Bin Laden sees "reclaiming the Islamic holy land and driving US forces out of the Middle East" as his sacred mission.
The Palestinians were robbed of their land by Israel; therefore they want to reclaim it and realize the dream of building an independent nation. Since the Temple Mount incident last September, however, Isrealis and Palestinians have been on the brink of war, exchanging provocations and assassinations.
Several hundred people, mostly Palestinians, have been killed since then. Despite its repeated claim to neutrality as a mediator, the US has tilted too far toward Israel. On issues such as the return of refugees and UN observer status (for Palestine), the Palestinians have accused the US of taking only the Israeli perspective and ignoring the rights of Palestinian refugees.
Indeed, the US, the self-proclaimed world policeman and peacekeeper, used to claim that its unilateral leadership would be conducive to stability and prosperity throughout the world. When intervening in regional conflicts as a mediator, however, the US has placed its own interests -- instead of ethics and justice -- as its guiding principle. This has resulted in partiality and injustice. For example, the US intervened in the Kosovo crisis for "humanitarian reasons" and vehemently condemned then Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic's "ethnic cleansing" activities.
But on the other hand, it has turned a blind eye to the Colombian government's murderous repression of its own people and the atrocities committed against the Kurds by the Turkish government. Instead, the US has provided these regimes with weapons and training. The ROC, a staunch anti-communist ally of the US during the Cold War, has also been abandoned time and again by the US -- first before the Korean War and then following Washington's policy to join hands with China to contain the Soviet Union.
In a reality shaped by such superpower leadership, many small countries or minorities have received very unfair treatment, which in turn has spawned anger and hatred.
While terrorist acts may cause massive short-term damage, they can never fulfill the ultimate goals of those who employ them. Instead, terrorists can invite even stronger retaliation and bring immense, unpredictable suffering to their compatriots, whom they intend to help.
Terrorist acts do not win sympathy; they are condemned as shameless and cowardly.
Force is not the only choice. In fact, it is not a proper choice. History is full of examples set by disadvantaged ethnic groups who were treated unjustly or even bloodily suppressed, and yet insisted on admirable non-violent means to achieve their ends. By doing so, they not only won international sympathy but also eventual independence and self-determination. The most famous examples are India's Mahatma Gandhi and US civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. The three Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia also relied on non-violent civil movements to unshackle themselves from the Soviet Union and win independence.
Attacking innocent, unarmed civilians is despicable and totally unacceptable in the civilized world. While the repressed, disadvantaged minorities deserve every bit of sympathy, no amount of suffering can justify the use of such cruel action against the innocent. Every human being, regardless of nationality or skin color, should feel sorrow for the suffering of the American people.
Humanity's highest guideline should be neither national identity nor religious affiliation. Rather, it should be tolerance and respect for life.
Today, when the world is being swept by the torrents of globalization, many minority groups and cultures are overshadowed, threatened and even exploited by powerful Western political and economic forces.
The pursuit of justice through non-violent means and the belief in peaceful coexistence should be the universal values by which all humanity abides.
Paul Ho is a graduate student at the department of journalism of National Chengchi University.
Translated by Francis Huang
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this