One of the fundamental pillars of Europe’s political architecture is a strong and enduring belief in the universal validity of equal, universal and inalienable human rights. At the core of this is a belief in the rights of human beings to a life of freedom and the protection of their dignity.
In the years after World War II, this humanist ideal became the basis of Europe’s spiritual and political identity and hence it is contained in the founding documents of the EU. Of course, this does not mean that the EU could or would want to conquer the rest of the world in the name of imposing its values, rules and culture on the rest of humanity. Far from it. What Europe’s devotion to humanism does mean, however, is a determination, no matter the circumstances, to stand firm and not abandon the fundamentals of European civilization and European unification. As a result, Europe places a primary emphasis on the universality of human rights and freedoms.
To be sure, there are many places around the globe where human rights and civil liberties continue to be trampled underfoot: North Korea, Iran, Burma, Tibet, Zimbabwe and many others. This week, a meeting of the EU’s General Affairs and External Relations Council will discuss once more relations between the EU and Cuba.
Despite repeated reminders from the EU, the Cuban government has done none of the things that the EU has been urging it to do for many years — above all, to release all political prisoners and stop the persecution of independent civic groups and the regime’s political opponents. On the contrary, the Cuban government continues to detain prisoners of conscience and to criminalize demands for a society-wide dialogue.
This year, the peoples of Europe are marking the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Iron Curtain that once divided Europe in two. That 20 years after this epochal event an iron curtain remains around Cuba makes this anniversary poignant.
Of course, the tourists who crowd Cuba’s beaches are not aware of this iron curtain. But, regardless of this ignorance and of its economic interests, the EU should insist on the release of political prisoners and use all international institutions to bring pressure to bear on the Cuban government to respect the human and civil rights of Cuba’s people. During any negotiations with Cuba’s leaders, European politicians and diplomats should remind their Cuban partners of their obligations. They should also be in contact with Cuban civil society to express their solidarity with the families of the political prisoners.
From its own experiences in the 20th century, Europe knows what catastrophes can result when concessions are made to evil. The history of the 20th century is an object lesson in this. Time and again, Europe paid a high price for policies of compromise with evil that were dictated by economic interests or the illusion that evil could be appeased and would disappear of its own accord. The EU should not and must not repeat this error.
Vaclav Havel was president of Czechoslovakia from 1989 to 1992 and president of the Czech Republic from 1993 to 2003.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS