Media self-censorship
In April, celebrated architect Daniel Libeskind urged architects to think carefully before working in China amid growing concern over the country’s ethical record in a public speech in Belfast. “I won’t work for totalitarian regimes ... I think architects should take a more ethical stance,” Libeskind said.
After his speech, New York Times reporters called every prominent architect practicing in China, asking their opinion about Libeskind’s remark. The Times also compared them to Albert Speer, the architect who worked for Nazi Germany.
I don’t think it’s fair to compare Rem Koolhaas or Paul Andreu to Speer, or China to the genocidal Nazi regime, but I agree that architecture can never be neutral and architects — whether or not they choose to work in China — should be aware of their role and that their work may be assimilated or exploited as political propaganda not only in China but around the world.
I pursued the issue and presented confrontational opinions and wrote an essay about it. After I submitted it to a highly respected art journal in Taiwan, both the publisher and editor-in-chief agreed it was a marvelous argument but said “No,” they could not publish it because they have a lot of business in China.
My criticism about China is actually much milder than those we see from Chinese themselves, and I made quite an effort to defend foreign architects working in China as a welcome result of Beijing’s open policy, instead of tackling how controversial the new architectural projects are.
Noam Chomsky has pointed out how willing the media are to self-censor articles even in a democratic society by preselecting right-thinking contributors, internalizing preconceptions among other systematic news filtering methods. Thus the mass media could be more credible tools of political propaganda, much more efficient than state censorship. Compared to the censorship imposed upon media in China, the voluntary self-censorship by the Taiwanese media is an even worse problem. It is a self-induced conformity to the interests of the powerful.
I was trying to refute Libeskind’s viewpoint, but somehow the intimidated editors proved that Libeskind was right.
C.J. ANDERSON-WU
Sanchih, Taipei County
France’s role in Rwanda
The Taipei Times published an Agence-France Presse report recently on the recent row between France and Rwanda over the latter’s recent report alleging Paris’ active involvement in the 1994 genocide (“France dismissed Rwandan report on 1994 genocide,” Aug. 7, page 6).
Regardless of whether or not France was directly involved, there is abundant evidence that the international community (ie, the UN) had much forewarning about the impending bloodletting. Not only did top UN officials know that a genocide was likely to occur, their actions and policies actually aided and abetted the Hutus in making it happen.
For instance, consider Canadian Lieutenant General Romeo Dallaire, who served as commander of the UN military forces deployed in Rwanda in 1993 to help monitor a ceasefire between the Hutu government and the Tutsi-led Rwandan Patriotic Front. Seeing the signs of the coming bloodbath, Dallaire sent an urgent fax to UN headquarters on Jan. 11, 1994, warning that the Hutu government was planning to register all Tutsis.
Through information provided by a defector, Dallaire correctly suspected that the purpose of this registration of Tutsis was for what eventually would lead to their systematic extermination. Dallaire’s request for permission to raid a government arms cache was denied by top UN officials. Instead, he was ordered to share what information he knew and from whom he got it with the Hutu-led government.
Who was it that effectively tied Dallaire’s hands and prevented him from doing all he could to avert the coming genocide? The name at the top of the UN fax reply sent to him was that of the chief of peacekeeping operations, Kofi Annan. As investigative journalist William Grigg said: “It says a great deal about the UN’s institutional priorities that while Dallaire — who had tried, as best he could, to prevent the genocide — was left to descend into alcoholism and suicidal depression. Kofi Annan — the man who in effect gave the green light for the genocide — was later chosen to be [UN] secretary-general.”
Nor is that all. After 10 Belgian soldiers were killed by the Rwandan killing squads, the Belgian government created a commission to probe the tragedy. In his award-winning book on the genocide in Rwanda, We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families, reporter Philip Gourevitch noted that Kofi Annan “refused to testify or allow General Dallaire to testify.”
Even the UN’s own inquiry into the genocide concluded that “the instructions from New York certainly gave the signal to the Interahamwe [the Rwandan killing squads] and other extremists that UNAMIR [the UN mission in Rwanda] was not going to take assertive action” to prevent the mass killings.
Whether or not individual countries should bear blame for the Rwandan genocide is a matter of debate but there is plenty of evidence to show that the greatest responsibility lies with top UN officials who handed down orders to the commanders and “peacekeepers” on the ground.
WAYNE SCHAMS
Pingtung, Taiwan
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs