Letters: Time to call China's bluff

It was heartening to hear US President George W. Bush liken Communism to Islamic militants who are trying to enslave nations. ("Islamic militants trying to `enslave' nations: Bush," Oct. 7, page 1.). Yet it is so disheartening to see the US take such an ambiguous stand for so long on the immediate threat Taiwan faces from China.

China not just threaten to enslave nations. It has already done so -- in Tibet and East Turkestan. It also tried its hand in South Korea, Vietnam, attempting an evil empire stretching from Mongolia to the Taiwan Strait, from North Korea to Hong Kong.

There is no moderate government in the territories China controls. If it controlled another nation such as Taiwan, where would it all end, until someone call its bluff? In the case of the Communist Chinese empire, they try to rally "Chinese nationals" all over the world, while they enslave the so-called "Chinese" Hans, Mongolians, Muslims, and countless ethnic minority groups willing or unwilling to be called "Chinese."

We praise Bush for his clear view as a leader in Iraqi policy. Yet, we must ask: Where is his clear view on communist China? Knowing the similarities between communism and militant Muslims, would it not lend credibility to his conviction on Iraq, if he also held the same conviction about Taiwan? I have always greatly admired Ronald Reagan for his clear views as a leader, in principals, and in the way he achieved them. A man who did not particularly like to be bothered with details, yet he had a keen sense of choosing the right people to take charge.

It was the likes of Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon, Detente, SALT I, SALT II, that elevated Russia to the status of an "evil empire," threatening a third world war. It was Ronald Reagan's clear sense, calling Russia's bluff, that brought down that empire. It is the ambiguity in the "one China" policy that allows likes of Zhu Chenghu (朱成虎) to threaten the use of WMD against the US. Who will be the 21st century's Reagan and call China's bluff?

Taiwan, under the past KMT regime, may be like the Vietnam of old, or the Philippines under Marcos. But Taiwan is an entirely different nation now. Taiwan is the kind of nation that Bush could only wish for in Iraq.

Of course we are still in the Iraq mess right now. Yet in lieu of China's clear threat to Taiwan, it is not too early to think about how to deal with the last evil empire on earth.

Supporting sovereignty for Taiwan ["US should support full sovereignty for Taiwan," Oct. 8, page 8] would be a small but definite step forward. Not only would it create a clear view of the world he is leading, it would greatly enhance Bush's credibility on Iraq, at least in this small corner of the Taiwanese-American community, and to uphold his conviction on the simple American value of freedom and democracy, and his determination to stand against tyrants.

Chen Ming-Chung
Chicago, Illinois