Peace and prosperity
After reading Nathan Jones's article ("Douglas Paal ignores the realities of occupation," Aug. 21, page 9), and Ching Li's criticism of it (Letters, Aug. 25, page 8), I quickly realized that Li did not put enough effort into validating his opposition. I rather congratulate Jones on a well-articulated, substantiated and persuasive argument. There are several instances in his piece where Jones provides evidence for his argument that clearly proves US President George W. Bush has failed as a leader since "stealing" the 2000 election.
First, Jones states that: "Yet nearly four months since the cessation of major military operations in Iraq, no one has been able to discover Saddam's allegedly mighty WMD [weapons of mass destruction] program." This, in itself, destroys Bush's credibility. A deadly WMD program was Bush's most provocative stance for going to war against Iraq (yet it failed to persuade most of the world's population that it was anything other than matters of oil, Bush's father and a need to raise approval ratings due to a depressed American stock market).
Bush even tried to justify his case with unsubstantiated statements that Iraq had purchased raw materials from Africa in his State of the Union address. Though Bush has since apologized for this statement, his administration still maintains they are certain that Iraq either still has weapons or they were looted prior to the war.
Neither of these cases makes the US case for war more credible, nor does it make Bush look like a savior of world peace after causing, what Jones states as, "a broken economy, collapsed former government, army of occupation and a foreign-appointed civil administrator [and] a foreign-appointed Governing Council." It is no wonder the number of guerilla attacks against Western forces has greatly increased recently.
Jones was also right to caution that actions similar to those undertaken by Bush does not make the world more safe but less so because it encourages other nations to wage war in order to achieve their objectives.
Jones looks at the long-running crisis in the Taiwan Strait. China has always claimed that while it may undertake force to convince the island to accept the "one-country, two-systems" policy, it prefers means more akin to increasing Taiwan's reliance on China's economy, diplomatically isolating Taiwan and encouraging the nation's opposition parties that it is in their best interest to accept Beijing's formula.
However, if America continues to advocate war as the ultimate solution, as it continues to step up its case to support invasions in Iran, Libya and Syria, then China will follow suit. It will use this case to unleash attacks in order to subdue pro-independence Taiwanese, Falun Gong supporters and followers of the Dalai Lama. Other nations are likely to agree: Columbia may well implement brutal force to punish its drug traffickers, Russia will use bloody exercises to overthrow Chechen rebels, the list goes on.
Li has blindly accused supporters of Jones, such as myself, as "a campaign clearly characterizing the common mentality of some Democrats in the US that when their view on a certain social or political issue differs from those of other people they insist that their view is the norm to follow." Li should understand that Democrats have a clear history of providing a strong economy, high employment, a healthy environment and a world at peace through subduing impend-ing conflict, not encouraging action after the conflict has begun, as is the case with Bush and his supporters in Baghdad.
Democrats generally lead strong generations and Lin should ask himself would this really be the case had former US vice president Al Gore been elected instead of Bush? Like Jones, as an American living in Taiwan, I see little to be proud of with the US administration and am optimistic that a "regime change" next year in Washington is the only way to solve the problems that Bush has unleashed upon the globe.
Finally, Li states that, "to me US President George W. Bush is doing just fine. Jones is probably laying out an argument against Bush simply for the sake of argument."
Well, if two wars over a three-year period, a depressed stock market, multiple corporate scandals, a sickened environment, a record-high crime rate, a record-high unemployment rate, violations against basic female and minority rights and an increased military budget that would much better serve its purpose as funds for low-income families, health insurance and wildlife preservation are signs of a successful administration, then I agree with Li that Bush is doing fine.
Other than making mock statements with zero evidence to support his pro-Republican, pro-Bush case, Li should make an effort next time to substantiate his support for the US government. Otherwise, support the Democrats and create a better life for yourself.
Geoff Merrill
Taipei
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry