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.
MICHAEL SCANLON
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.
PAUL DEACON
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.
JOAN QUAIN
Victoria, Canada
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing