The measure of a society is not in the sophistication of its material culture nor the rise in its quality of life. It is in the consideration it shows for its weakest and most vulnerable members.
Regarding the recent disaster in our neighboring countries in Asia, what is our attitude toward this tragedy in Taiwan?
There are simply too many things in this world that cause concern. But as members of the world community, we need to consider these issues, which affect the whole of humanity. But living in Taiwan, where is our effort directed? What are we concerned about? We are concerned about whether we are called Taiwan or China. Whether we are Taiwanese or Chinese. Whether we have 26 or 27 diplomatic allies.
The loss of life from the earthquake off Sumatra and the associated tsunamis is the highest of any such event in many decades. Even if the victims survive the immediate situation, the job of rebuilding their homes and assuaging the grief of their loss will be long and hard. This should not be difficult to understand by people who have experienced the 921 Earthquake. Taiwan's charitable organizations responded so rapidly and warm-heartedly in providing aid to the devastated areas.
Compared to the compassion of the people, the government's performance seems to have come up short. Taiwan is constantly saying that it wants to "engage with the world," so isn't this time, when much of Asia is engulfed in disaster, a good time to act? The government need only divert its generous diplomatic budget, or its arms procurement budget, and it would be able to assist innumerable people engulfed by the disaster. Could any action be more meaningful?
I recall reading about Mark Chen (
We have spent US$41.5 million to buy off a tiny country that will not stand firm in its support for Taiwan. If we are that concerned with the status that other countries accord Taiwan, and want the whole world to know about Taiwan and respect Taiwan, then surely giving US$41.5 million in aid to the quake victims in south Asia would be far more beneficial? By doing this, not only do we help people in time of trouble, we also accumulate merit and elicit the heartfelt admiration of people around the world. Why should we not act in this way? The reasoning is obvious, and I truly hope that our government can see that our priorities are revealed by where our compassion lies.
China will now be contributing US$63 million in money and goods to the relief effort. If our government really wants to compete with China, we should compete in the area of who can do more for the victims of disasters around the world than to compete over who can spend more on armaments.
Following the 921 Earthquake in Taiwan, half the donations received by the Red Cross came from abroad. In our time of need, people in other countries came to our aid and did not ignore us. They reached out a helping hand. Now that south Asia has suffered a natural disaster many times more severe than the 921 Earthquake, and people of the affected countries are in dire straits, both the government and the private sector should go their aid, helping them overcome their current difficulties and rebuild their homes.
C.V. Chen is a senior partner at the law firm, Lee and Li, and president of the Red Cross Society of the Republic of China.
TRANSLATED BY Ian Bartholomew
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past