A far cry from responsibility
Chen Shih-meng’s (陳師孟) opinion piece (“Tsai must be clear on Chen’s right to fair trial,” May 29, page 8) claims that I am of the opinion that former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) should follow the example of late South Korean president Roh Moo-hyun and commit suicide. This is a far cry from what I said.
In the interview referred to, I said that, “No one can demand that Chen should follow the example of Roh Moo-hyun and commit suicide, but he should at least apologize and return the money as suggested by former Academia Sinica president Lee Yuan-tseh (李遠哲). He should also follow Roh’s example of accepting responsibility instead of placing it on his officials and implicating others.”
LIN CHO-SHUI
Taipei
Racism is not cute
Why should Taiwanese expect the rest of the world to respect their country when they don’t respect it themselves?
In the face of claims so often made of the progressive nature of Taiwanese society being a compelling basis for the nation’s full-fledged international recognition often flies the actual treatment, by the local people, of their international guests.
Indeed, systemic abnormality is so close to the surface that it regularly erupts in the kind of embarrassing behavior that Rosanne Lin points out in her letter (Letters, May 29, page 8).
A great measure of respect consists in genuinely accepting others and thereby treating them without prejudice. It is hypocrisy when you say and even feel that you accept others — but then turn around and put on a special performance in your treatment of them.
When locals see my face, they immediately start speaking to me in English. This is a special performance that sends me the message, “I am exceedingly conscious that you are not one of us.”
Sorry, but I don’t need to be reminded every single day by everyone I meet that I’m different from Taiwanese. You’ve already succeeded gloriously in letting me know this.
In my erstwhile wish to be treated normally in Taiwan, I used to tell the locals I’d meet — in Taiwanese — that it was okay to speak to me in Mandarin. This however accomplished nothing better than eliciting squeals of “Nide Taiyu jiangde hen hao!” and so on, putting me right back at square one: being treated prejudicially, as someone who should not be expected to learn the local languages or appreciate the local cultures, roped off outside.
Part of the problem, I understand, is that Taiwanese have had the career and social importance of English impressed upon them so feverishly that anyone they see who looks like they might be a native English speaker immediately becomes seen as a channel of English, rather than as a human being to be treated as normally as anyone else.
But a much greater part of it precedes Taiwan’s English Age. It lies in a very deep, shared sense of “otherness” in the culture. This conception of the “other” is learned in the home from an early age, it lurks within, and it gives rise to behaviors ranging from fascination to fetishism to fear.
I had a heartbreaking experience in my relationship with Taiwan at the Muzha Zoo two years ago. A mother was pointing out and teaching the names of the animals to her two small children. Then she pointed to me and said “Waiguoren — say hello!”
What does it say about how much someone respects their country when she treats people from abroad like monkeys in a zoo?
MARTIN DE JONGE
Fulong, Taipei County
Conducive pragmatism
It was thrilling to read that Representative to Canada David Lee (李大維) was invited by the Canadian Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade to testify on the latest developments in cross-strait relations (“Envoy testifies on cross-strait ties to Canada committee,” May 29, page 1). Lee’s appearance, alongside Australian High Commissioner Justin Brown and others, was of historic significance, symbolizing the innovative and subtle global trend of “win-win-win” strategy.
In this “flat world” of the 21st century, as Thomas Friedman contended, confrontation should be replaced by multiple partnerships characterized by rational competition and educated creativity for sustainable development in the global context. The pragmatic approach that Canada has adopted is reminiscent of the efforts that it initiated in promoting substantial economic, cultural and educational relations with Taiwan.
When I was director general of the Ministry of Education’s Bureau of International Cultural and Educational Relations from 1997 to 2003, I saw and assisted in Canada’s efforts to build bridges in the Asia-Pacific region, with special footing in Taiwan, through the framework of promoting cooperation of higher education and cultural schemes. Accelerated exchanges of all types and closer relations for mutual interest have been accomplished.
Pragmatic policy similar to Lee’s address in the Canadian parliamentary committee reminded me of being invited to participate in the “Education Commission of the States” in Denver, Colorado, in 1995 alongside representatives from Canada and Singapore. I had productive discussions on international education policy and cross-cultural relations with former US secretary of education Richard Riley and several US governors.
The Taipei Times story also implied that Canada and the US have long realized what Lee pinpointed: “Over the past two decades, Taiwan and China have developed close economic, cultural and educational ties as a result of the comparative advantages that each side has in the global supply chain.
This echoes a Washington Post editorial from 15 years ago, “Taiwan Reconsidered” (Sept. 13, 1994), which asserted: “But relations between the two Chinas are changing fast. Far from the bristling hostility of past decades, there are now strong and growing commercial ties between the two, with heavy Taiwanese investment in a mainland economy that is far from communist.”
What the Washington Post proposed 15 years ago has already become a stark reality today.
The pragmatic policies that Canada and the US have adopted in fostering diverse and substantial relations with Taiwan are conducive to constructing a harmonious society and will eventually serve the best interest of everyone in the international community.
LI CHEN-CHING
Taipei
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
RSS