Don't believe the hype
I am writing in response to your editorial (April 17, "China's despots know only lies," page 8). Everybody knows the current situation in China was similar to Iraq and Baghdad under President Saddam Hussein, but please don't fall into the trap of believing everything you see emanating from US television media.
On any number of Web sites (www.informationclearinghouse.info is just one example) it is possible to see another view of the `liberation of Baghdad' taken from the Palestine hotel. What you will see is a very different picture from the close up shots transmitted on cable channels around the world: 1. Three US tanks blocking access to Fardus square during the "uprising". 2. No more than 100 people attacking the toppled statue (hardly representative of a city with a population of 5 million) 3. Henchmen of Ahmed Chalabi (an Iraqi stooge of the Bush administration that was flown into Iraq with 700 supporters by US forces) in and among the crowd.
I understand and sympathize with Taiwan's position in the international arena, having lived there for around five years and I too hope for a democratic China one day, but before you embarrass yourselves in your blind search for American political support, cast your minds back a few weeks, and remember the justifications for the invasion of Iraq. Weapons of mass destruction and links to al-Qaeda were just two. How conveniently these have been forgotten now that the regime has crumbled.
Everybody agrees that Saddam was an evil, cruel dictator that deserved to be overthrown. But before taking another dig at the Communist regime across the Strait, remember that China is not the only country that takes part in propaganda when trying to justify it's own illegal actions.
Richard Hazeldine
Newcastle, UK
What is your mother worth?
In response to the government's recent interest in Tawu township as a possible depository for the 98,000 barrels of nuclear waste currently infecting Orchid Island, I would like to implore the government to rethink this ill-conceived plan and respect the human rights of all the people of Taiwan, current and future ("Officials mulling site in Taitung for radioactive waste, April 18, page 2).
I agree the waste needs to be removed from Orchid Island as soon as possible and brought back to the main island of Taiwan for permanent storage, but I do not feel the waste should be shuffled around to poor townships or Aboriginal areas where the benefits provided by nuclear energy is marginal in comparison to the cities and industrial areas where air conditioners, neon lights and heavy machinery blast day and night.
A friend on Orchid Island best explained the sentiments of the Tao people when he said, "On Orchid Island we are very independent and everyone has their own ideas so we can never agree on anything. The one thing for which we can find consensus is the removal of nuclear waste from our island."
My friend's thoughts do not only reflect the feelings of the Tao, but also reflect what happens in any pluralistic society when it feels faced with an immediate crisis; it unites, decides and acts. The painful message from Orchid Island should be carefully considered before the government decides to act on the Tawu site.
Although the current residents of a poor township may wish to see the kind of money the Taiwan Power Co can wave in front of their noses, monetary rewards are short term fixes that take advantage of a transitory state of poverty. One day, when the money has dried up or the standard of living increased, the children of Tawu may wish to grow up out of the shadow of nuclear waste.
The best way to solve the problem of the existing nuclear waste is to move the waste back to the nuclear energy facilities from which it came, thus generating an environment of immediate crisis on the main island of Taiwan.
Only when faced with the present danger of nuclear energy will the people of Taiwan break their apathetic, out of sight out of mind attitude, and make a final decision on the future of all nuclear power on Taiwan, including the unfinished Fourth Nuclear Power Plant.
Sure, there is always the pragmatist who will discuss money, both wasted and saved, but the issue is much larger than the bank balance. It is an election year and it would be prudent to believe the president is merely trying to make good on an election promise, but at whose expense?
I would like to ask each citizen of Taiwan to consider the following question: If one human life was lost due to nuclear power on this island, how much money is that life worth? What if she was your mother?
Andrew Kerslake
Taichung
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers