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
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
RSS