Taiwan’s trial of the century
Nineteenth century France had its Dreyfus trial. The 20th century saw Nelson Mandela unjustly persecuted in South Africa during the “apartheid” era and Julius and Ethel Rosenberg tried and executed for espionage against the US.
All of these “trials” exposed the evils of the societies in which they were held. In the end, it was the French, South African and US societies that were found guilty and put to shame.
I am convinced that Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) trial will prove to be similar; it may well end up being Taiwan’s trial of the 21st century.
Chen’s trial is a severe and portentous test — a test that Taiwan almost without a doubt will fail.
Chen is not really the one on trial. The one actually on trial is Taiwanese society in general.
More specifically, it is the hypocritical, cowardly and duplicitous caudillo administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) that is on trial.
Also on trial are the “attack dog” prosecutors and judges who are colluding with Ma in this pig circus, sham of a trial. In Chen’s case, the judicial system has been hijacked and turned into a parody of itself — an obscene travesty.
Also sharing the blame are the hack media that are merely the spokespeople and lackeys of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
The whole thing is nothing but a fraud. Chen isn’t being put on trial for money-laundering or any other “financial irregularities.” He’s on trial and being persecuted for upholding the dignity and sovereignty of Taiwan.
He’s on trial for possessing the integrity and moral courage to resist selling out to China. And for whistle-blowing.
I’m sure that exposing a daughter of the former premier for plagiarism could not have won him many friends in the KMT ranks.
And yet, by sowing the wind, one will reap the tempest. This sham trial of Chen will most certainly come back to haunt Taiwan.
East Hartford, Connecticut
Trade is never neutral
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is too naive to be president if he seriously believes that any economic agreement with China will be politically neutral, or that a referendum is not necessary if a trade agreement has no “political items” (“Ma rejects idea of ECFA referendum,” May 30, page 1).
Free-trade agreements are never politically neutral. They always express clear political goals (for example closer relations, unity, security or greater prosperity).
They have clear political consequences for sovereignty because they bring economies closer together, limiting the actions of a government. Hence “Euroskepticism” in some EU countries and dissatisfaction with the North American Free Trade Agreement by some North Americans.
Moreover, referendums can theoretically be held on any issue the government chooses — not just political issues. Given China’s views toward Taiwan, and that any free-trade agreement has the potential to radically alter the “status quo” between China and Taiwan, a referendum is not only justified: It is overwhelmingly necessary.
Gueishan, Taoyuan County
Beijing hasn’t changed
This year marks two anniversaries that are testimony to the brutality and ruthlessness of China’s despotic one-party state: the Tiananmen Square Massacre and the persecution of Falun Gong.
Twenty years ago on June 4, the world watched in horror as troops with tanks and machine guns stormed Tiananmen Square and crushed unarmed students who had gathered to demand democratic reform. Hundreds, possibly thousands, were killed.
On July 20, 1999, the regime launched the persecution of Falun Gong, complete with its own Krystallnacht-type middle-of-the-night mass arrests. Ten years later, the torturing and killing continue, with Falun Gong practitioners composing half of the quarter million labor-camp prisoners in China, US State Department figures show.
The June 1989 protests, which took place in many cities across China and involved millions, was a courageous bid to escape the repressive yoke of communism.
But alas, it wasn’t to be. While China’s economy has surged ahead, human rights and freedom of opinion for the Chinese people is still a pipe dream.
The nature of the Beijing regime is repression and killing. It’s a pattern begun by chairman Mao Zedong (毛澤東) that has not let up — it’s just done more covertly these days. The Tiananmen Square Massacre and the crackdown on Falun Gong, a non-political spiritual discipline, are proof of that. This particular leopard has not changed its spots.
I just hope that those who want to see China become the next great world power remember this.
In a Facebook post on Wednesday last week, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City Councilor Hsu Chiao-hsin (徐巧芯) wrote: “The KMT must fall for Taiwan to improve.’ Allow me to ask the question again: Is this really true?” It matters not how many times Hsu asks the question, my answer will always be the same: “Yes, the KMT must be toppled for Taiwan to improve.” In the lengthy Facebook post, titled “What were those born in the 1980s guilty of?” Hsu harked back to the idealistic aspirations of the 2014 Sunflower movement before heaping opprobrium on the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP)
The scuffle between Chinese embassy staffers in Fiji and a Taiwanese diplomat at a Republic of China (ROC) Double Ten National Day celebration has turned into a public relations opportunity for the government, Beijing and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Although the incident occurred on Oct. 8, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) downplayed it, only for the story to be picked up by the foreign media, forcing the ministry to respond. The public and opposition parties asked why the government had failed to remonstrate more strongly in the first instance. It is still unclear whether the ministry missed a trick
US President Donald Trump and his Democratic rival, former US vice president Joe Biden, are holding their final debate tonight. In their foreign policy debate, China is sure to be a major issue of contention for the two candidates. Here are several questions the moderator should pose to the candidates: For both: In the first televised US presidential debates in 1960, then-Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy and his Republican counterpart, Richard Nixon, were asked whether the US should intervene if communist China attacked Taiwan’s outlying islands of Kinmen and Matsu. Kennedy said no, unless the main island of Taiwan was also attacked.
For most of us, the colorful, otherworldly marinescapes of coral reefs are as remote as the alien landscapes of the moon. We rarely, if ever, experience these underwater wonderlands for ourselves — we are, after all, air-breathing, terrestrial creatures mostly cocooned in cities. It is easy not to notice the perilous state they are in: We have lost 50 percent of coral reefs in the past 20 years and more than 90 percent are expected to die by 2050, a presentation at the Ocean Sciences Meeting in San Diego, California, earlier this year showed. As the oceans heat further and