Too many pinyin systems
In your report on the protest about the MRT's new romanization system ("Protesters want uniform English on MRT signage," Jan 1, Page 22), Lee Shang-shien (
"The situation that English signs in Taiwan show inconsistent romanization, with most places using Tongyong Pinyin but some using Hanyu Pinyin, boils down to virtually `one China, two systems,'" he said.
Lee said that the city government's excuse that Hanyu Pinyin is the romanization system designated by the UN is not correct.
"I don't understand why Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
Did Ma Ying-jeou (Hanyu Pinyin: Ma Ying-jiu) really "disrespect" the decisions of the Taipei County Government? I simply can't be sure, but let's take a closer look at the rest of the argument and see how things balance out: The "one China, two systems" argument thrown into that mix is simply a huge red herring. As I recall, the policy of the central government is to give local governments the freedom to decide which system they would use. While there has supposedly been "a system" in place in Taiwan for a long time, I can only echo my earlier remarks regarding the ridiculous "one street, five or six so-called systems." Any form of standardization would be an improvement, but let's make the right choice.
It only makes sense for Taipei -- the most "international" city in Taiwan -- to use the system which is the international standard. Ma must keep in mind that the romanization is done specifically for people who can't read Chinese characters and that there are many other ways for Taiwan to promote its own identity.
I'll tell you what -- if those locals who would oppose Hanyu Pinyin do so because of its association with China, they had better also give up spoken and written Mandarin for fear of appearing two-faced. Otherwise, making Taiwan more "user-friendly" for foreign visitors will improve its standing.
Andrew Hokanson
Taichung City
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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