Two big news stories have been the focus of world attention recently. One is the war on Iraq, and the other the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). The US-Iraq war will lead to the deaths of soldiers on both sides of the conflict, and some infected people may die from SARS. Both pose a serious threat to human life. But deaths in the US-Iraq war are caused by man, while SARS does not discriminate between friend or foe, government official or civilian. We all have to work together to avoid both these things.
The media are mobilizing all resources in reporting the threat SARS poses to Taiwan, and both central and local governments are adopting response measures, all the while being blamed for acting too slow or not doing enough. We can all sense the danger, and people are becoming more aware of the need to wash their hands regularly. They are also using masks, especially in airports and hospitals. Other countries are also doing their utmost to prevent the spread of SARS. So long as a government cares for the lives and safety of its people, it will do all it can to prevent SARS. Since we all are afraid of dying, and because human life is valuable, it must not be lightly sacrificed.
In contrast, if we look at the US-Iraq war, the deaths of soldiers or civilians are considered something to be expected, showing that life has become a matter of straightforward number-crunching. The two warring parties both want to destroy the enemy and annihilate its army, hoping to exact the greatest possible number of casualties to ensure victory. Often, if the enemy is not killed on the battlefield, they can fight another day and kill. Killing becomes the goal.
War is certain to produce casualties, and parties to a war are prepared to sacrifice hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of their own people. Different tactics or strategies will lead to different death tolls and have different effects. The leaders in a war have to make decisions that will have an impact on the number of casualties. This is the moment when human life turns into numbers, and becomes part of the cost of war. On the battlefield, a human life is sacrificed as lightly as that of an ant or a cockroach invading a desktop.
The lives of civilians receive no guarantee of protection during a war either. Bomb explosions will unavoidably also kill civilians. The inevitability of this makes it clear that the everyone involved, from the commander in chief to the bomber who releases the ordinance do not value the lives of the citizens on the ground. They are even willing to accept death by friendly fire, so it is quite obvious they don't care if civilians are killed. Many civilians are killed or wounded as a result. War also leaves some areas without water and electricity and even without provisions and medication. Many people, especially children, will therefore die of disease or starvation. War will not only kill a lot of soldiers, but even more and innocent civilians will be affected, their lives hanging by a thread, living in hunger, thirst and fear.
War also brings hatred and a wish for angry revenge. The normal reaction when loved ones are killed by the enemy is anger and sorrow and to blame the enemy and those who started the war. If the enemy is an invader the victims's family and friends feel that their country has been violated and their hatred will be even deeper and thoughts of revenge will burn in their minds. If their army is too weak to efficiently strike back at the enemy, they may resort to a suicide attack because one victim can be sacrificed in exchange for the deaths of many enemy soldiers. There have already been reports of Iraqi suicide bombers attacking American soldiers.
People who have been given help and love normally react by helping others in return. People who have been hurt react with anger and, as far as possible, revenge on those responsible. Hatred does not bring peace, but often only leads to damage and destruction. The Sept. 11 incident hurt the US and the American people, and their anger and sorrow is understandable. The US attack on Iraq is not acceptable to a majority of nations, and most Iraqis probably see the US as an invader in a war bringing large numbers of military and civilian casualties. Given such a situation, Iraqis are certain to be filled with hatred, and we needn't worry that there will be a lack of people willing to carry out terrorist attacks.
In war, human life is lightly discarded by other humans, and no further thought is given to sorrow and pain. In peaceful and advanced nations, SARS may not necessarily kill those infected, but governments and their peoples are doing their utmost to mobilize all resources and manpower to prevent its spread. In comparison with war, life is highly valued in the former case. For the happiness of mankind, every attempt should be made to avoid war. War will normally only bring hatred, and hatred produces more war.
Shen Mei-chen is a lawyer.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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