"One China" in its present form and throughout history uses brutal force to assume and maintain a monopoly of power, to annex territories domestic and beyond -- this is nothing less than "one imperial China."
Taiwan is not a colony of the US [Letters, May 17, page 8]. For the US and UN to support "one imperial China" is a disgrace, and a travesty of their founding principles, not to mention impractical and dangerous.
People and organizations the world look up to are the leaders of democracy, peace and humanity. When it comes to Taiwan, where are these global powers leading the world to?
Have the five permanent UN Security Council states been given the right to carve up the world and stake their claims on smaller nations to become subservient colonies as they see fit?
Is imperial China really what you want to support? Or are you just like an ostrich, burying your head in the sand and refusing to be confronted by reality?
Taiwanese conscience and identity did not suddenly found itself sixteen years ago. It has always been there since Taiwan was known to the civilized world as Formosa centuries ago. It was suppressed for decades, if not centuries, by brutal regimes foreign to the inhabitants.
Taiwanese just spoke out the first chance they had 16 years ago, and the Taiwanese conscience has been growing stronger ever since.
Taiwan has also never been as strong as it is today. With 23 million inhabitants, its population ranks ahead of three-quarters of UN member states. Its economy ranks 17th in the world, and its high-tech resources rank near the top of the world's nations.
Left all alone to fight the Goliath of the Chinese empire, you can be assured of great human tragedy, and not just for Taiwan. Are the US, the UN and the world listening? Do you refuse even to see the potential? Or must you wait for disaster to strike?
Recognize what Taiwan is -- a sovereign nation -- and what Taiwanese deserve like any other world citizens: self-determination. And call Imperial China off its belligerence. And save your own soul!
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
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