An open letter to Minister Lin
Minister of Transportation and Communications Lin Ling-san (
The decision of your ministry to retract the priority right of Evertransit International to build and operate the proposed Taipei to CKS International Airport mass rapid transit (MRT) line due to their inability to attract sufficient financing has attracted much press coverage.
Permit me to support your decision and to endorse the upgrading of the Taiwan Railway Administration's Linkou line as the best solution for a service to CKS.
First, the TRA's Linkou line option would be much cheaper. Given the difficult economic environment that Taiwan has found itself in, this is fiscally responsible. I have read that the TRA's Linkou line solution is projected to cost one-third of the cost of the MRT option.
Second, the Linkou line option would provide superior Taipei-CKS services and journey times. Express services could set off from Taipei's Sungshan, Main and Panchiao stations and travel nonstop to CKS. A CKS service on an MRT line would require stops at every station en route and result in slower journey times. The line might also be used for commuter services.
Third, the TRA's Linkou line option also has the potential to operate services to Taoyuan, Chungli and Hsinchu and on to more cities in central Taiwan. This would bring the additional benefit of a reduction in highway congestion in northern Taiwan to and from the CKS area.
Lastly, developing a new revenue source for the TRA would be critical given the revenue loss the TRA would face upon the opening of the new Taiwan High Speed Railway between Taipei and Kaohsiung and the opening of the new Eastern Taiwan expressway between Taipei, Ilan, Hualien and Taitung.
This new revenue source would be vital if the Taiwan government is to realize its ambition of privatizing the TRA.
C. Loren Aandahl
Minneapolis, MN
A cause of confusion
The Bush administration has created a major difficulty for itself with its first-strike policy, or preventive war doctrine. In addition to pursuing that policy the administration is a firm advocate of dealing directly with the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). One area clearly undergoing crisis in that regard is the Middle East.
As the US is basically at war with Islamic fanaticism, these two US policies above have blurred together and causes a lot of confusion. A clear-cut foreign policy is better by far than a two-headed foreign policy.
Does the US want to check the spread of WMD or does the US want to illustrate first-strike policy? Psychologically speaking, do Americans really have the heart for the Middle East's historic predicament or is it American self-interest alone that is the key factor?
Roger George Petrol
Mt. Shasta, California
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under