Ban should cover `dual use'
The EU's plan to develop a "code of conduct" before lifting the arms embargo imposed against China simply will not work ("Arms Ban on China to be Lifted," Jan. 14, page 1). Once the weapons are sold to China, how can EU nations interfere in its internal affairs -- and how will the Chinese military use it?
The US, which opposed the EU's move, should have learned a painful lesson from its own sales of "dual-use" technologies (which have civilian and military implications) to ostensibly civilian organizations and academic institutions in China: supercomputers and rocket and satellite technologies wound up in military-controlled front companies or field sites of military regions.
The EU should not delude itself and risk a major confrontation with the US. The EU can sell other products and services to China.
Vincent Wang
Richmond, Virgina
Exclusion is an outrage
The tragedies caused by the devastating tsunami that struck Southeast Asia have raised an all-out relief effort from around the globe. Taiwan -- itself a weathered victim of natural disasters -- and its people have once again shown their sincere philanthropy toward tsunami victims by emptying their pockets and gathering essential food and medical supplies for the affected countries.
Unfortunately, Taiwanese's relief supplies have been kept at bay, and Taiwan, even as one of the major contributors, has been denied representation in conferences coordinating relief efforts, simply because of the unjustified and inhumane pressure from one of the members of the UN. Such an act not only hurts the feeling of the people of Taiwan but also affects the very survival of the tsunami victims.
As dismaying as it is, this turn of events is not new to Taiwanese. Two years ago, when Taiwan was under the full-scale assault of the SARS virus originating in China, the very same country claiming to represent Taiwan did its best to keep the World Health Organization from delivering critical samples to Taiwan for establishing diagnostic protocols.
Such an evil deed was by no means less brutal than the gassing of the Kurdish by former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and deserves the harshest condemnation by the global community. However, the UN's inability to resolve international disputes and enforce resolutions continues to encourage the display of barbarian behaviors by rogue nations.
The UN and its affiliated organizations' negligence in acknowledging Taiwan as a sovereign political entity was once again shown in an article published in the September 2004 issue of National Geographic, authored by the director of the UN Secretariat for Disaster Reduction, Salvano Briceno.
In the article Briceno listed the seven deadliest quakes from the past 30 years, including 2002 Molise earthquake in Italy that killed 29 people and 1994 Northridge earthquake in California that claimed 58 victims. As unbelievable as it is, the list doesn't include the killer quake that rocked Taiwan on Sept. 21, 1999, claiming more than 2,400 lives, including those of my father-in-law and grandmother-in-law, and causing a direct property loss of around US$10 billion.
The failure of Briceno's staff in recognizing the level of damage caused by the quake, which seems to imply that Briceno and his staff have deemed the lives perished in Taiwan unworthy of mentioning and the lessons so traumatically experienced by Taiwanese irrelevant to the glorious goal of "Disaster Reduction" of his organization, is puzzling and extremely disheartening to the families of the 921 victims.
We may naively hope that the omission of the 921 earthquake information from the article was a result of unintentional ignorance on the part of the UN Secretariat rather than an act of deliberate negligence. Unfortunately, the reality indicates otherwise.
The failure of the UN and its affiliated organizations in recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign state and the continuing the exclusion of Taiwan's participation in nonpolitical activities such as tsunami relief, as if Taiwan does not exist on the surface of the globe, will not only encourage further aggressive behaviors by rogues but also hurt the people of Taiwan and prove a disservice to humanity in general.
After all, tsunamis and viruses are politically and ethnically blind.
Lin Sung-chyr
Taichung
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS