While well meaning, Richard Halloran's article ("Time to conclude Japan's string of apologies for World War II," Oct 7, page 9) calling for a final listing of all Japan's apologies to East Asian victims of its aggression during WWII contains a glaring factual error and also a logical misstep.
He states that the emperor of Japan is the only one with the moral and constitutional authority to speak for all Japanese people. To make this statement displays ignorance of basic political facts in Japan.
The individual who speaks for all Japanese is the prime minister, chosen through democratic means in a democratic society.
The constitution clearly states that the emperor is merely the "symbol" of the people. Why call for the current emperor to speak for all Japanese precisely when you are arguing for apologies for the actions of a political system of the past, one of the most salient characteristics of which was that the emperor was the constitutional sovereign, a decidedly non-democratic arrangement?
Halloran's argument, taken on its own terms, makes no logical sense. And it makes no legal sense, either. The elected government of Japan speaks for the Japanese, not the emperor, just as in Britain and the US and every other democracy around the world.
Scott O'Bryan
Assistant Professor of History, Indiana University,
Indiana, USA
Chinese actor Alan Yu (于朦朧) died after allegedly falling from a building in Beijing on Sept. 11. The actor’s mysterious death was tightly censored on Chinese social media, with discussions and doubts about the incident quickly erased. Even Hong Kong artist Daniel Chan’s (陳曉東) post questioning the truth about the case was automatically deleted, sparking concern among overseas Chinese-speaking communities about the dark culture and severe censorship in China’s entertainment industry. Yu had been under house arrest for days, and forced to drink with the rich and powerful before he died, reports said. He lost his life in this vicious
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
In South Korea, the medical cosmetic industry is fiercely competitive and prices are low, attracting beauty enthusiasts from Taiwan. However, basic medical risks are often overlooked. While sharing a meal with friends recently, I heard one mention that his daughter would be going to South Korea for a cosmetic skincare procedure. I felt a twinge of unease at the time, but seeing as it was just a casual conversation among friends, I simply reminded him to prioritize safety. I never thought that, not long after, I would actually encounter a patient in my clinic with a similar situation. She had
RSS