By denying Taiwan a seat in the UN, Chiang Kai-Shek (
To this date, the KMT and its splinter Chinese politicians, deny the Taiwanese the right to be "independent." The question is, did you ever heard of anybody denying his or her own country the right to be "independent?" Can the KMT administration be anything else but a foreign regime? Can the KMT -- now that they have lost power -- be anything else but foreign agents?
To deny the Taiwanese the right of independence, while claiming to be Taiwanese, is as absurd as a normal American 18-year-old denying his or her own right to own a driver's license. Or a normal 21-year-old denying himself or herself the legal right to drink beer.
For the December local elections, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) had better pick up its LP (Ed. note: LP is short for lam pa, or colloquial Taiwanese for testicles). Tell your constituents to throw out all of these foreign agents, out of every township and every jurisdiction. It is precisely these foreign agents -- that are occupying your legislature, bureaucrats, media, education and controlling your purse -- where all the chaos lies in Taiwan.
If the DPP continues to avoid this issue of national identity, particularly in local elections, including the "neo-DPP" advocates, it may never have the chance or the need again, if the KMT wins the 2007 legislative election or the 2008 presidential election.
The time to begin is now.
Chen Ming-chung
Chicago, Illinois
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