In its campaign against Iraq, America is virtually alone. Never has it provoked so much public opposition, resentment and mistrust. I fully support US President George W. Bush in his efforts to defend his homeland, to defend democracy and to take any measures to end the threat of terrorism. I do not believe that those anti-war factions in Taiwan have a clear understanding of how we live (with democracy and justice), what we fear (terrorism and biowarfare) and what we support (prosperity and lawfulness).
The news media in Taiwan is biased in the reporting of the crisis in Iraq. Pack journalism -- the tendency to cover what everyone else is covering -- adds to that occupational hazard. Many recent stories by journalists in Taiwan take an essentially immoral view of Bush. Various critics from opposition camps view the Bush administration as misguided, incompetent or overly hungry for war -- a few even seriously entertain the claim that president Chen Shui-bian's administration is bent on political conquest through self-aggrandizement or by being an incompetent sidekick to Bush.
The anti-war activists completely ignore the evidence of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's intractable evil -- his state-backed megalomania, his unprovoked wars of aggression, his use of chemical weapons against the Kurds and Shiite minority in Iraq, the expulsion of UN weapons inspectors, the attacks on US aircraft, his support for terrorist organizations and his defiance of 17 UN resolutions since his defeat in the Gulf War. This includes the one which was passed just four months ago, giving him a "final opportunity" to comply "fully and immediately" or face "serious consequences."
Saddam's administration was full of terrorist-style plans to create biological weapons. The regime sought to acquire chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and has in several documented cases succeeded. Saddam gassed 60,000 of his own people in 1988, and launched two catastrophic wars, sacrificing nearly a million Iraqis and killing or wounding more than a million Iranians. Human rights atrocities have also become the norm in Iraq. Arbitrary arrests and torture are systematic. Female political prisoners are raped as a matter of policy. Prisoner executions occur without due process. Saddam has long been prepared to subject his people to a devastating war for one purpose -- to extend his power by developing and deploying the world's deadliest weapons.
We should be dedicated to ending the suffering of all people, including the Iraqi people. They are prisoners in their own land and they yearn for freedom and for the simple things that we take for granted -- democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of association and the right to vote. Only the marshalling of American and coalition troops on his border interrupted Saddam's pursuit of power. Only the most naive moralists could fail to admit the implications of Saddam's behavior.
Crises require serious moral judgment, backed by swift and lethal force. Neither of these were employed during the outbreak of hostilities in Kosovo or Rwanda: in Rwanda alone, the UN stood by as mindless bloodletting claimed upwards of 800,000 lives. The faith-based idealism of some anti-war groups, however, is no substitute for sober judgment when considering the threat from Baghdad. I respect the right of free expression by any citizen, a right no one has enjoyed under Saddam. I wish people would praise the US and coalition troops in the field, or just stay silent. When Iraq is finally liberated, anti-war groups will learn that they have not been speaking for the people of Iraq.
Sometimes I wonder how many great thinkers and ideas have been eliminated by vicious regimes. Mahatma Gandhi would never have been able to get his message out if he were living in present-day Iraq or any other harsh dictatorship. He wouldn't have lived long enough for the world, much less his countrymen, to hear his name. The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr is another example of this truth.
I believe that the anti-war movement is actually a positive thing for the world. It shows that our system is working. Our job now is to fight the propaganda and to make sure that the focus stays on the issue. Saddam's ruthlessness, aggression against his neighbors, contempt for international law and desire to acquire weapons of mass destruction -- are all facts which are plain enough. No faith is required to see such self-evident truth.
In principle and in practice, US power is not simply good for America, it is good for the world. Most of the problems the world faces today -- from nuclear proliferation, war crimes, land mines, biological weapons, to the combating of AIDS -- will be solved with increased US engagement. Other countries are neither ready nor able to take on the challenges and burdens of international leadership. Suddenly, terrorism has become the world's chief priority, and every country has had to reorient its foreign policy accordingly.
Defeating this despotic monster will send a timely message to other state sponsors of terrorism. We should give full support to the US as it tries to muzzle Saddam in Iraq, Kim Jong Il in North Korea or Osama bin Laden, in whatever cave he may be hiding in.
Chang Chun-hung is a DPP legislator.
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