Print

Mail

wiki links

Letters:

Tio's letter misguided

Yoshiko Tio's letter (Letters, March 21, page 8) provides his readers with the true reason why he opposes foreigners' objections to Taiwan's support of the US, but fails to explain the real motive behind President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) support of the US in Iraq.

Tio's numerous statements like "Taiwan should support the US 100 percent on this war. The US-Taiwan alliance is our best alliance," and "As Taiwanese, we should stand side by side with the US, our best ally" are unnecessary.

Tio's scorning of foreigners who tried to persuade the government to adopt a neutral position towards the war and not support the US should have likewise been omitted. There was never any doubt that Taiwan was going to back the US position in Iraq as a non-combatant, humanitarian aid provider. The reason for this is clear: Taiwan does not want to jeopardize the US-Taiwan alliance because the US is the greatest supporter of Taiwan's sovereignty and supplier of Taiwan's defensive means against a pre-emptive Chinese attack.

Tio stressed the need to maintain the alliance as well, but states Taiwan's primary devotion to the US position is in the joint interests of democracy and freedom. Democracy, human rights and freedom are not guaranteed by the US, while the robbery of Iraq's oil and the US' increasing presence as a superpower in the Middle East is.

Tio also stresses that we should keep in mind that the initial attacks were launched by terrorists on Sept. 11, 2001. There is no evidence Iraq has connections with major terrorist organizations and Osama bin Laden himself has labeled Saddam as an "infidel." Even the relationship between the Taliban and Saddam's regime is not one based on friendship or devotion to bringing down the US.

Tio's statement that the US-Taiwan alliance should not be jeopardized is unnecessary since a letter by foreigners to Chen objecting to the US position means nothing to Bush. The sole reason behind Taiwan's position is to guarantee its future as a beneficiary of US military and financial aid.

Taiwan is a peace-loving, friendly nation and should oppose the loss of lives and the use of war to justify an end. Tio is wrong to insist the US is a friendly nation that has freedom and democracy as its primary agenda and to criticize foreigners for writing to Chen to protest his support for the US.

No such letter will ever damage the US-Taiwan alliance against China's aggression and American support of Taiwan will always be unconditional. Doesn't a democratic society like Taiwan provide people with the right to express their concerns to the head of state?

Finally, Tio is wrong to state that "The majority of Americans support US President George W. Bush" and that "The UN is a weak country club and not worth a damn." If that were really true of the UN, why does Taiwan spend millions every year trying to get readmitted to it and its subcommittees? If its membership matters so little, why is Taiwan so vocal in criticizing China for locking it out of the UN?

Furthermore, had Bush made public his plans to attack Iraq if elected, America would currently be listening to "president" Al Gore. Bush's recent support, far below the level his father enjoyed in 1991, is nothing more than a brief stirring of emotions. Once the war has ended, Bush will become the target of criticism for his abysmal record on economic management and ineffective leadership. The only resolve will be to elect another leader in 2004.

Geoffrey Merrill
Taipei

Ng's research lacking

I am afraid Ng Chiau-tong missed a major point in his examination of country names ("Why not call this nation `Taiwan?' -- it's simple," April 11, page 8). He assumes that everyone is a republic in order to be a country of juridical standing. This Tai-wan republic mythology is misleading and is indicative of soft analysis by too many Taiwan independence supporters. The official names of some major countries are: Dominion of Canada, Dominion of New Zealand, Irish Free State and Union of South Africa.

Of course, the British Dominions of Ireland and South Africa are now republics since severing the last colonial links with the British Crown. However, the juridical standing of "colonial status" has not impeded the likes of Canada or Australia since the 1935 Act of Westminister.

Technically, these legislative colonies are still plenary creatures of the UK parliament, but these plenary self-governments are now on equal standing because of British legislation. And the rest of the world has not rejected the juridical status of the Dominion of Canada. In fact, the first Canadian Embassy was opened in Washington soon after World War II.

What is in any juridical labeling is far more than a "republic" but juridical conceptualization of a Taiwan republic has become an oxymoron to the talents of Taiwanese thinkers. Who really cares about the color of the cat if it catches mice? If it is not juridically-impaired by the family of nations, then republic or dominion are immaterial to obtaining a widely recognizable juridical status of a distant foreign country called Taiwan.

Jeff Geer
Las Vegas, Nevada
This story has been viewed 2259 times.