Targeting scooters no answer
In your story about motorcycle parking fees, the student surnamed Cheng is right to cast doubt on the city government's sincerity in curbing congestion by charging scooter drivers parking fees ("Motorcycle parking fees to be enforced in Taipei," Dec. 24, page 2), but wrong when he says that scooter drivers are a minority. It is obvious to any road user that scooters at least equal if not outnumber cars on city streets, and yet all traffic laws and regulations are unfairly designed to suit the real minority -- car drivers.
Congestion is not caused by scooters, but by those people who automatically assume that they absolutely must take with them on their journey from home to office a sofa, two armchairs, a fitted carpet, an air conditioning unit, at least four ashtrays, a stereo system, and possibly even a color TV, karaoke machine and drinks cabinet. Everything but the kitchen sink.
If the city government was sincere in its efforts to reduce congestion, it would legislate to reduce the number of selfish car owners, promote scooter driving as an environmentally sound and cost-efficient way to move around the city, and carry out a cull of the reckless, inconsiderate, dishonest and usually criminal taxi drivers. Targeting scooters is not the answer. After all, imagine if every scooter driver in the city took the bus or started driving a car. That would really be congestion.
Quentin Brand
Taipei
Support Ma's recycling plan
I would like to applaud Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) on his plan to collect and compost food waste. When I lived in Taipei I was distressed by what I thought was the local population's complete disregard for their environment. However, Ma's progressive and necessary plan will place Taipei firmly in the forefront of environmentally-friendly waste management not only in Asia but in the entire world.
My colleagues and I have been lobbying our municipal government here in Toronto to do the same for years. A considerable body of evidence supports the need for both pay-as-you-throw and composting programs, especially in congested urban areas lacking landfill space, and the two will complement each other nicely.
I urge your readers to fully support this plan as it is green, economical, and will also lead to technological progress.
Scott Vokey
Toronto, Canada
Taiwan must choose carefully
Well put, Bode (Letters, Dec. 23, page 8). As he says, it is not "China" per se who is pointing almost 500 missiles at Taiwan. Neither are the 1.3 billion Chinese the enemies of Taiwan. Not even many of the PLA soldiers, who are only-born sons in the family, due to China's one child policy, and who will die if "China" invades Taiwan.
It is those Communist dictators who are the source of this evil. The only benefit "China" will gain from this atrocity is a firmer Communist grip on the power to reign over Chinese people. Much like the old Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) achieving the same goal of ruling over Taiwanese people by claiming its aim was "retaking the mainland." The only thing these dictators understand and respect is power. The only way to deter these thugs from starting a war is to let them know that, if they start shooting missiles, hundreds if not thousands of deterrent missiles will rain on their heads.
The public is normally complacent and forgetful, in Taiwan and elsewhere, because they have "more important things" to do, such as making a living, and rightfully so. Remember, former US President George Bush failed to win re-election only a few month after the first Gulf War.
It is the leaders who should worry about these things, and prepare the public for them. The public only have the task of choosing the right leader, to know whom they should trust. That makes the next presidential election more important. The electorate must realize the importance of whom they choose.
In choosing the right leader, Taiwanese -- who are lucky enough to have the freedom to choose for themselves -- will be choosing for Chinese too, who are not as lucky.
Chen Ming-Chung
Chicago
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