A referendum question
I've read all of your editorials on the upcoming referendum and the various scenarios should President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) win re-election, and your views on China's reaction to it.
I have also noted the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and People First Party (PFP) alliance's strong resistance to the referendum, calling it illegal, among other things.
You say, quite rightly, that "if a majority of voters support the framework, both sides will have to shoulder the responsibility of international expectation for cross-strait peace," (Editorial, Feb. 07, page 8) but there is an obvious problem to this statement that you have not yet clarified.
This prompts the question, should the pan-blue camp win the election, what is to stop them from claiming that the referendum was illegal and as such they do not have to comply with the people's wishes?
Michael Wise
Tamshui
State of self-deception
It's understandable that Arthur Shih believes Taiwan is not in a state of emergency because he lives in New Zealand and need not worry about the consequences of any of the 500 or so ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan misfiring and landing on his doorstep (Letters, Feb. 5, page 8).
He suggests that the government should "silence all critics and send [the referendum] to the committee and have it certified" if the administration is so sure of its legality.
It seems to me that Shih either prefers a dictatorship or does not understand what democracy is.
Perhaps it's a timing issue? Would you consider Taiwan in a state of emergency the moment the Chinese military moves toward the launching pad, during countdown, at zero or when the missiles are in the air, Mr. Shih?
I'm all ears.
Lin Shao-huei
Arizona
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