I strongly disagree with Charles Liu's views about Falun Gong muddling facts (Letters, Dec. 29, page 8).
Why is Beijing's abysmal track record in the spotlight lately? It is not surprising, especially with the news of Beijing officials profiting from live organ harvesting from Falun Gong members. Investigative reports maintain that it has been going on since 2000.
The world response to what Kilgour-Matas have condemned has been encouraging, with a recent hearing in a US Congressional sub-committee and Amnesty International's New Zealand branch calling for further investigation.
The Taiwanese, Finnish and Australian governments, as well as the European Parliament, have backed the allegations. But so far China hasn't granted permission to any international observers to probe the allegations. On the contrary Beijing arrested and silenced the human rights lawyer, Gao Zhisheng (高智晟), who extended an invitation to the Kilgour-Matas research team.
For such an abhorrent practice to be allowed to take place in the 21st century is unacceptable. By all means, China should be held accountable for such crimes against humanity. In the run-up to the 2008 Olympics it would be in China's best interest to live up to the promises they made to secure the games -- that is, to improve their rights record.
With the recent shooting of Tibetans at the border, intensified crackdown on human rights lawyers along with tightened Internet and press censorship, not to mention widespread corruption, China's rights record is in decline. It is clear that this long list of violations, including organ harvesting, has put Beijing apologists on the spot leaving them with very little to say.
Marie Beaulieu
Victoria, Canada
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
RSS