Think about the victims
I would like to respond to Michael Tsai’s letter (Letters, March 14, page 8) on the death penalty. It is filled with fallacious arguments and incredible insensitivity.
First, as is customary, he assures us that he empathizes “with families who have suffered great pain,” as if a few empty words are at all helpful to families devastated and destroyed by murderers. Does he think his empty words are any consolation? Instead of concentrating his letter on the victims, he spends most of his time trying to protect killers from rightful execution resulting from a sentence passed by the judicial system, as well as ignoring the wishes of the people of Taiwan, who support capital punishment in overwhelming numbers (over 70 percent). But then, democracy and the rule of law can be so inconvenient when they don’t match Tsai’s ideas.
Tsai trots out the old argument about “an eye for an eye” taken from the Old Testament, which he clearly does not understand. The phrase which he considers to be so inhumane is actually meant to protect people. It does not mean that if someone takes your eye, he must lose an eye, as Tsai erroneously believes. It means that an eye is the limit; you cannot take someone’s life for an eye. It was a very humane concept to prevent people from escalating punishment in revenge. He continues: “It goes without saying that life is precious.” Well, why does he say it then?
He focuses on the life of criminals, murderers who didn’t share Tsai’s enlightened viewpoint. They took life and thereby forfeited their sacred right to life. The people of Taiwan understand this very clearly and do not need the writer to civilize them.
Tsai then asks if executing murderers will “truly heal wounds?” This is a specious question. One could equally ask: Should families who have lost a loved one to a cold-blooded killer have to live with the knowledge that the guilty killer is alive while the innocent victim is dead? Tsai raises another misleading argument that execution is not a deterrent. Could that be because so few murderers are executed and that it takes so long that the public forgets? He prefers “solitary confinement for life” as a “humane” alternative. Tsai is incredibly naive to believe this.
If he knew anything about his humane solution, he would never have offered it. Several years ago, prisoners in Italy serving life sentences pleaded to be executed, as they considered their endless incarceration to be too inhumane. Do the hardworking taxpayers of Taiwan want to support killers for a lifetime in prison with all its attendant costs? I think not.
CHAIM MELAMED
Pingtung
Taiwan bound by law
Thank you for your editorial on the dangers of executing the innocent (“Opinions differ on death penalty,” March 15, page 8).
Hsu Wun-pin (許文彬) seems to think that as long as the death penalty system ensures no innocent people will be executed, nobody will object to the existence of the penalty itself. This is wrong.
Many people, including myself and members of the Alliance to End the Death Penalty, do object to the idea of the state using death as a means of punishment. The goal of perfecting the system to avoid all mistakes is a path many US states have taken, resulting in the costs of capital punishment cases far exceeding the cost of lifetime imprisonment. Yet, even with all these expensive legal safeguards, human beings, including judges, may err.
Second, in defense of former minister of justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰), it should be noted that her position has been public knowledge since she was first appointed. The president and the premier certainly knew her opinion and implicitly supported her. However, there was an immediate threat to their political careers after Wang made her comments and so they turned their backs on her. She deserves to be congratulated for her courage and clear principles.
EDMUND RYDEN
Sinjhuang
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
RSS