Your editorial on Monday stated that it is a tough question whether to back US President George W. Bush or Senator John Kerry in the US election.
If the US election were about Taiwan, that might be the case. It is not, however. Neither is it merely about the US. It concerns the entire world. Whatever our local interests, we in Taiwan cannot overlook that fact.
Since Bush dubiously came to power, the world has undoubtedly become a more dangerous place. There are many more people worldwide who resent and hate the US than there were in 2000. Alliances, formal and informal, that have maintained the peace for 50 years are weaker than before due to Bush's unilateralism.
The Bush administration failed to prevent the aerial attacks on US soil its own intelligence services had warned of. It squandered the goodwill of the entire world in the wake of Sept. 11 (Remember Le Monde's headline "We are all Americans today"?) It started a largely justified war in Afghanistan but failed to find Osama bin Laden or crush al-Qaeda.
In the wake of Sept. 11, Bush actively sought a war in Iraq, seeking to oust president Saddam Hussein on spurious grounds of links with terrorism and claims of non-existent weapons of mass destruction. The fact that Saddam was a secular dictator with little more in common with bin Laden than the fact they are both Arabs didn't seem to concern him.
The idea that Saddam was developing nuclear weapons was tenuous from the start, though no doubt he would have loved it if he could get hold of them. The notion that he had or was developing chemical and biological weapons was initially more plausible, though losing credibility by the day as the UN inspectors searched for evi-dence. Unfortunately it is more difficult to prove the absence of weapons than their presence.
Having invaded Iraq guns blazing, Bush had no plan for winning the peace. In the immediate aftermath of the invasion, there was goodwill in Iraq to those who had liberated them from a vicious tyrant. As with Sept. 11, this goodwill was squandered through a combination of inadequate planning, incompetence and heavy-handed tactics that could almost have been designed to aggravate resistance. Iraq is now full of terrorists who were not there before. Some flowed in through the permeable borders left by the failure to maintain an Iraqi infrastructure, others were recruited due to the ample reasons Bush gave them to resent the US.
As a result of this, not only have thousands of Iraqi, US, British and other coalition combatants died, but also many civilians -- Iraqi, US, British, Japanese, South Korean and more. Their deaths are all direct results of the actions and inactions of Bush.
Bush's Orwellian, on-going war against reality is only the start. The world is a more dangerous as a result of his scandalous denial of climate change, the Kyoto Treaty and other environmental issues. Even if I am not killed in a terrorist attack or caught in a war zone, my life will be directly affected by Bush's love-in with the oil producers and irresponsible rejection of a precautionary principle on climate change.
Few would question that the Bush administration has in general been pro-Taiwan. I love Tai-wan, and were the Chinese to invade tomorrow I am sure that there are many pan-blue politicians with little allegiance to Taiwan who would pick up their ever-so convenient US passports and leave long before I did.
But this cannot bring me to support a president who is a danger to the world both in terms of aggressive foreign campaigns, aggravating the terrorist threat and neglecting our global environment.
Toby Wilsdon
Taipei
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers