Singapore's inclusiveness
As a Singaporean, I applaud the recent "unofficial" visit to Taiwan by Singapore Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong(李顯龍) to see his personal friends ("Singaporean ties boosted," Wednesday, July 14, 2004, Page 1).
However, I was taken aback by China's reaction to Lee's "unofficial and private" trip to Taiwan. For whatever reason, the Chinese authorities came to conclude that such a private visit denotes that Singapore was no longer adhering to the "one China" policy. In my personal opinion, that conclusion is as absurd, as is the threat that "Singapore will have to bear all the consequences of the visit."
First of all, China has to recognize that like itself, Singapore is a sovereign country. As tiny as the island of Singapore may be, surely Singaporean leaders and citizens are free to visit any country on social visits or for holidays. The Chinese authorities should also realize that threats of "consequences" will only lead to problems instead of solutions. China's foreign ministry spokesman said: "Lee Hsien Loong has been in the upper echelons of the Singaporean government for many years. Hence his status does not change during an "unofficial and private visit."
Regardless of who visits Taipei, Chinese authorities ought to accept the reality that politicians in Taiwan do have personal friends. The key issue here is that these friends are not accorded the usual official diplomatic or red-carpet treatment, which is usually reserved for the leaders of Taiwan's official diplomatic allies. China must not read too deeply into such visits from leaders from other countries, whether it is by a former vice president of the US or the future prime minister of Singapore. In view of the global challenges facing us today, be it in the fight against terrorism or economic and trade issues, all countries have to tailor their policies and priorities according to their best interests. And Singapore is no different.
Singaporeans and Chinese people have to accept the reality that Singapore's strong and firm relationship with China does not insinuate that we should cease to maintain friendships with other countries. China may well argue that Taiwan is part of China, but Lee has never declared or acknowledged Taiwan as being independent. Where then is the basis to claim that the private visit constitutes a "serious violation of the Singaporean government's commitment to the `one China' policy?"
Personally, I believe it is due time for one of Singapore's senior leaders to visit Taiwan, even if it is on a private visit. As it is, Singapore has military personnel training in Taiwan and also has a trade representative office in Taipei. Just as Singapore has much to gain from the various exchanges with China, I am certain that a similar approach with the Taiwanese would serve us well. I visited Taipei in May, almost eight years after my previous visit. I am amazed at how much the Taiwanese society has improved. During his visit, Lee also met older-generation politicians such as KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and politicians of the younger generation, such as President Chen Shui-bian(陳水扁), Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and the up-and-coming Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌). Perhaps China might be worried that a firm Singapore-Taiwan relationship would result in a scenario where Singapore loses focus and priority on Sino-Singapore relations. China should be reassured that the city-state has different objectives in its relationships with both China and Taiwan.
China has to accept both the reality that a firm Sino-Singapore relationship can co-exist simultaneously with a relationship between Taiwan and Singapore, and also that Singapore has the right to pursue its own courses and policies on the international stage.Lee's "private" visit is surely an indication of the deep respect we hold for the "One China" principle.
Jason Lee Boon Hong
Singapore
Who is China fooling?
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) does not know the difference between what it calls the "hypocrisy" of the imperfect Western democratic system and its own perfectly evil totalitarian system ("China snorts at Western concern for human rights," July 16, page 1).
China does not seem to understand that Western democratic laws are a contract between the government and its people, and more or less agreed to by the people they govern. Chinese laws, on the other hand, are dictated by the CCP. The checks and balances on power, which are emphasized in Western democracies, are non existent in China.
China enjoys the privilege of membership on the UN Security Council but does not want to be bound by its international human rights conventions. Sure, China does not need lessons from its Western "friends." It is not that China doesn't know the rules, it is that China willfully intends to break them.
Their own repressive laws are a "domestic affair," not like wife-beating used to be called a "domestic" affair in the West.
It's as though China doesn't know it is now the 21st century, and human rights abuses cannot be excused away as a domestic affair anymore. China's overall interests, as determined by the government, takes precedence over the freedom of Hong Kong, Tibet, East Turkestan and for that matter, every town and city in China.
One can't help but wonder, whose interests do the CCP serve? Who is sacrificing for whom? The Chinese government doesn't seem to know the answer to these questions, but the rest of the world knows.
Chen Ming-chung
Chicago, Illinois
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations