Keep Taiwan, Uncle Sam
Charles Glaser is a pinhead for suggesting the US consider making concessions to China, including the possibility of backing away from its commitment to Taiwan to avoid military competition with China (“Abandon Taiwan: US academic,” March 2, page 3).
If Taiwan were abandoned, Taiwanese would suffer from the US’ betrayal, they would lose their freedom and democracy and go back to an era of totalitarianism like under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) during the Martial Law era. Taiwan, known as a “beacon of democracy,” would become the first democratic country to convert to communism in the 21st century.
Internally, Taiwanese are also very much concerned that the KMT government is too “inclined toward China,” like a conspirator. If Taiwan were lost to China’s hands, the US would become a country without credibility, a paper tiger and a passe superpower in the eyes of its allies around the world.
The US strategic defense line along the Western Pacific rim would lose a vital link — Taiwan — and even the security of the US itself would be jeopardized.
Since the US owes China billions or trillions of US dollars and has been importing most commercial products from China, Glaser might as well suggest importing military supplies from China to avoid military competition. He should understand that a balance of military power is one of the means of maintaining world peace.
Japan and South Korea would be seriously victimized if Taiwan were given up by the US. Oil and liquefied natural gas supply routes to Japan and South Korea might be hindered or even blocked by China.
The resentment of Chinese against Japanese due to the Nanking Massacre during World War II still persists. Mass demonstrations in China against Japan are sometimes utilized to stabilize the Chinese government.
Be strong and uphold the Taiwan Relations Act, Uncle Sam.
CHARLES HONG
Columbus, Ohio
The tragedy of tragedy
It seems a tragedy in itself when it takes major injury and loss of life such as the Greater -Taichung pub fire to move government officials to enforce existing laws and create new ones.
Where have these paid public servants been hiding? Isn’t it a bit obvious that there is a difference between a beverage store and a pub?
My sincere condolences to the families of those killed and injured. We must not let this happen again.
TOM KULECK
Taichung
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
RSS