For or against us
I am really surprised about some of the war commentaries on the news. It looks like Taiwanese people should embrace the US and UK's action against Iraq, out of gratitude for the protection given us against the China threat.
Well, I give thanks to the US for its position against China bullying Taiwan, but this should not darken my ability to make a proper judgment on the war against Iraq.
Nazi Germany attacked and annexed countries around it under different excuses (not as imaginative as pre-emptive attack) but always with the notion of "national security."
Anyone with a bit of critical reasoning will agree that Iraq is not a paradise. There are quite a lot of doubts on the sincerity of Baghdad when it says that it has no weapons of mass destruction, or biological or chemical weapons. They are quite good in the game of deception.
But do all these make a unilateral attack on Iraq plausible? Does my dependence on US support in the international arena impede me from making an ethical discernment?
Should Taiwan blindly follow his "master" even though he may be wrong?
The US unilateralist attitude, the UN's inefficacy and Iraq's defiance all should be taken into account. Ethics are not merely based on utility, but on some principles. One of those is "reciprocal interest."
By this I do not mean that we should ethically approve what is good for us (this seems to be the idea in a lot of political commentaries) but to change roles when making the judgment.
This is known as the golden rule -- found in most of the ethical and religious codes all over the world -- "Do as you wish it should be done to you."
It may be in our national interest, for example, that US attacks Iraq, and takes control of the country and its oil reserves. As an oil-dependent economy this should boost our slugging economy.
But what if another country (much bigger and powerful than us) -- under what they consider enough evidence on a crucial question (separatist activism that intends to break their motherland) -- initiates an attack on our land under the premises of national security, international stability and liberation of our people from evil separatist forces?
How do we feel if they can do all this in front of a muted international bunch of spectators? We should aim to promote and defend a more substantial UN role in world affairs and to hope for a day in which "war," which has been reduced to a linguistic archaism, is only used as metaphor.
Today Taiwan is "interesting" to the US, but interests switch over time -- and then where should we go to make our claim heard? Who will stand at our side?
We should keep on denouncing UN injustice toward Taiwan, the UN's conflict of interests, the US "macho" attitude in world affairs, China's bullying.
Today we can, as a nation, give thanks to the US for their support, but as a good friend tell them, too, that sometimes it is quite an annoying, hypocritical ally.
Let's not be like the blind leading the blind. If in this subject the US has lost sight, let's offer them some light; keeping our eyes closed is not in our best interest.
Francisco Carin Garcia
Taishan, Taipei County
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.