According to a deliberative opinion poll conducted in mid-January, a majority of Americans support US President George W. Bush's idea of fighting terrorism and preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). However, Americans are opposed to US unilateral action in solving these problems. They prefer it to be done under an international framework.
This poll originated from James Fishkin at the University of Texas at Austin and was conducted before and after the National Issues Convention held in Philadelphia by MacNeil/Lehrer Productions between Jan. 10 and Jan. 12. The main issue at the convention was "Americans' role in the world." The 344 delegates who attended the convention had been randomly selected from across the country by the University of California at Berkeley.
The opinion poll showed that 87 percent of Americans ranked Iraq as a threat. About 90 percent supported fighting terrorism and preventing the spread of WMD. However, those who supported unilateral US action to stop the spread of WMD dropped from 58 percent to 44 percent after the convention. Those who supported unilateral US action to stop terrorism also declined from 67 percent to 52 percent.
Through three days of discussions with other delegates and experts, those who attended the convention started to become more engaged and informed about the issues. Therefore, the deliberative opinion poll could correctly reflect real public opinion.
At the end of this convention, a two-hour program -- anchored by Jim Lehrer -- was broadcasted live on PBS and Japan's NHK (Japan Broadcasting Corporation. Richard Haass, director of policy and planning at the US Department of State, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, former US national security advisor, were invited to take part in the program to discuss US foreign policy issues with the delegates.
The delegates had some of the same questions as the international community. Why does the US have different ways of dealing with Iraq and North Korea? How is the US going to justify a preemptive strike on Iraq? What is the criteria for a preemptive strike? If US uses a preemptive strike, would such a move then justify a Pakistani attack on India, a Chinese attack on Taiwan and a North Korean attack on South Korea? In order to balance North Korea's nuclear development, will the US support Japan in developing nuclear weapons?
Haass and Brzezinski emphasized that Iraq's record of complying with international agreements is very bad. Moreover, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has WMD and supports terrorism. They said UN 1441 Resolution is the best international alliance against the Iraqi regime. As for North Korea, they said diplomacy must be used first since not only is the situation on the Korean Peninsula complicated, but many regional powers, such as Japan, China and Russia, are involved.
The Bush administration has shown an eagerness to go to war with Iraq. European countries, except for Britain, are against such hastiness.
There are two options for US President George W. Bush right now. One is to use force against Iraq without UN authorization -- which would risk condemnation from the international community and weaken the prestige of the UN. The second option is to give weapons inspectors more time and wait for an international consensus to act -- which could erode the US' military advantage.
After Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation at UN on Feb. 5, France, Russia and China demanded more time for weapons inspectors. The results of the opinion poll are surely worth consideration.
Lin Yu-chu is an associate producer at the Washington bureau of NHK.
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
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with