Religion not a problem
I object to portions of the opinion piece on the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) on China ("SARS can modernize China in long term," April 28, page 8).
I do not wish to debate the main topic -- the parts I would like to object against is: "In recent years, China has proven its ability to deal with, or at least suppress, problems related to Falun Gong, AIDS and the protests of laid-off workers. Why should SARS be an exception?" and later "The SARS problem is different from those of Falun Gong, AIDS and laid-off worker protests."
I strongly protest to putting Falun Gong in the same list of `problems' as AIDS and SARS. Perhaps it was not the author's intention to put down the good name of Falun Gong, however, it was certainly very misleading and creates negative impression about Falun Gong for a person new to the subject.
Falun Gong is the practice that advocates high moral standards and has been honored by the governments and the people of the numerous countries, including Taiwan, for its contribution to the stability and morality of society.
There are no problems related to Falun Gong that have ever been mentioned by the government of any country except China. China's human rights record is notoriously poor and it is not only Falun Gong practitioners who suffer greatly from state-sponsored medieval persecution.
I implore you, do not intentionally or unintentionally assist the Chinese government in spreading lies about the "phantom menace" of Falun Gong. The only thing Falun Gong practitioners do, which is regarded by the Chinese government as a "problem" is to tell the truth about the practice and the inhuman persecution that takes place in China. This is a basic human right of any person -- to defend one's good name and then object to being treated cruelly and unjustly.
Ioulia Valouiskaia
Laurencekirk, Scotland
A different perspective
I am simply in shock after reading Chien Hsi-chieh's (簡錫土皆) article ("Setting a new policy for Taiwan," April 29, page 8). Not only am I shocked, but also worried about the future of Taiwan and its people, should they share his views.
Allow me to offer a different perspective based on what Chien.
Chien wrote: "We shed tears over a disaster that human civilization cannot undo." I watched television and saw only tears of joy flowing from the Iraqis dancing in the streets of Baghdad, realizing their new-found liberation. Baghdad did not fall to pieces. In fact, Operation Iraqi Freedom will go down in history as the war with the least collateral damage.
High-tech weapons were fine-tuned to strike targets with more precision than ever before. Most of Iraq remains unshaken and intact.
Chien also opposes "further wars of invasion by the US against other nations."
It seems Chien failed to realize that the serious consequence of war was authorized in various UN Security Council resolutions and finally in Resolution 1441. The US and Britain were just holding the council to its words clearly stated in the papers.
Chien's idea of the "legal rights of a nation" is quite scary. Should the UN and the International Criminal Court (ICC) determine a nation's legal rights? If that is the belief, then the people of Taiwan should abandon all hope, because we have absolutely no rights internationally. China, a vocal and prominent member of the UN, and its allies have denied all our rights already.
It is important to remember that the UN is not a government of nations. That would clearly violate all national sovereignty. The people of Taiwan can still stand tall and proud and enjoy the rights of a global citizen in the international community even though the UN does not welcome us for political reasons.
Chien is fond of the ICC and wants it to investigate "whether US President George W. Bush's war on Iraq constitutes what the ICC specifies as war crimes." Chronologically, the ICC ought to find out whether former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein is a war criminal first.
Why wasn't there a push for the ICC when Hussein's atrocities were well documented? This seems like a case of anti-American hypocrisy.
I respect anti-war and pro-peace opinions. Nobody likes war, but sometimes it is inevitable due to evil and oppression. Sometimes anti-war sentiments turn into something dangerously twisted, too.
Eugene Liu
Atlanta, Georgia
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