Don't trivialize tragedy
I would like to respond to John Yang's comments (Letters, Sept. 23, page 8).
Yang's use of the recent tragedy in the US to comment on Taiwan's lack of national unity is absolutely deplorable. Not only does it trivialize the nature of patriotism in the US by comparing it with military and economic might, he is at the same time lambasting the people of Taiwan.
Overt signs of nationalism say little if anything about a country. It is what people do inside their hearts and the way they manifest these feelings of love toward their fellow citizens not only during times of need, but in terms of how they conduct themselves every day, that counts.
The hoisting of flags represents only the symbolic form of national unity. One cannot compare such a tragic event in the US with the aftermath of elections in Taiwan -- this is a cheap ploy at snubbing the opposition parties and the people associated with them, and also mocks Taiwan's fledgling democracy.
Yang's appreciation for solidarity, unity and "no squabbling among politicians, no babbling from the media and no complaints from the citizens" is disturbing. These qualities befit a country that needs to rebuild and unite under extreme circumstances. Is Taiwan currently mired in such dire circumstances that the opinions of opposition parties require repeated snubbing? Should we begin to quiet down the pesky media? The reason why Taiwan is a democracy today is because people can speak freely, the media can "babble" and politicians can complain out loud.
To measure the unity and patriotism of the people of Taiwan based on the availability of flags in local stores is utterly contemptible. This is not to say that there are no problems with our political system today, but comparing the unity of Americans after the Sept. 11 attacks with Chen Shui-bian's (
Our nation is more than a symbol on a piece of cloth. Is Yang really writing from the US? If so, he needs to re-evaluate the true principles behind democracy and appreciate that the ongoing interaction of different ideas is what people are most proud of in a free society.
The people of Taiwan will unite for their freedom. They will, Mr. Yang.
Chiao Yuan-Ming
Walla Walla, Washington
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
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath