How safe are you?
There has been much in the press recently about fire safety in public places in Taiwan — the fires in a Greater Taichung pub and a residence hall in Hualien County to name but two. I wonder how much the powers that be really care about public safety. I am a visitor to Taiwan, currently living in Greater Kaohsiung, and am disconcerted by what I have seen in many public places: fire extinguishers that have a plastic cable tie securing the pin to the handle. This renders it impossible for people to pull out the pin and use the extinguisher during an emergency, where there may well be panic, confusion and disorientation, as when fire breaks out in the middle of the night.
I recently stayed at a top Taipei hotel and found that all extinguishers (of which there were many) had this feature. I invited the manager to show me how she would pull the pin in case of fire and she could not, nor could I. She was visibly shocked and within a short time had made sure that all ties were removed from the hotel’s extinguishers. I slept more easily knowing that if fire broke out, I would be able to use one.
How many other establishments are risking lives? I have seen this in many other places in Taipei and Kaohsiung: A residential high-rise block (where incidentally the extinguisher was also enclosed in a plastic wrapping), the Taipei MRT trains and stations, a gas station, a shopping mall, restaurants and a residence hall.
When I mention this to Taiwanese friends, they almost all say that it is common practice and that maybe it deters vandals. I hardly think this would be the case, given the nature of vandals. One even suggested that ties are removed when an inspection is due and replaced afterwards — I sincerely hope this is not true. Another said that the ties should break easily, but I dispute this.
Can anyone explain the reasoning behind this widespread practice?
LESLEY YHEARM
Greater Kaohsiung
Bag of dirty tricks
It appears President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has reached into the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) “bag of dirty tricks” and pulled out one, accusing 17 former Democratic Progressive Party officials of violating the National Archives Act (國家檔案法). Ma is borrowing tactics from authoritarian Singapore — using the judiciary to sideline the opposition.
Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) told me in no uncertain terms, during a conversation in his private office in Tamsui (淡水) in June 2005, that there was no comparison between the authoritarian one-party state of Singapore and Taiwan’s vigorous, open and evolving democracy. Also, the only real difference I can see between the KMT and the People’s Action Party (PAP) in Singapore is that the PAP is not corrupt.
The lead-up to next year’s presidential election in Taiwan is going to be difficult enough without the KMT’s “dirty tricks.” You can bet the financial, political and technological clout of China will come into play. Chinese hackers have already gotten into the computers of at least three major Chinese dissidents I am in contact with, and with Ma’s open policies, Chinese Communist Party sympathizers and agents are surely in place throughout Taiwan.
I urge the people of Taiwan to “wake up.” Your hard-won freedom and democracy are very much on the line here.
WILLIAM COX
Nome, Alaska
MIDDLE EAST MALADY
Why all the surprise at the killing of the Italian pro-Palestinian activist by a Palestinian militant group in Gaza?
Many activities conducted by the Palestinians go against their apparent best interests. For example, the rocket fire into Israel. If Israel is half as bad as the Palestinians make out, why on earth do they continually attack Israel, trying to provoke Israel to react? Clearly they have something to gain.
Israel ended the occupation of Gaza in 2005 and the Palestinians have invested far more heavily in trying to get Israel to come back than building a prosperous future for themselves — something one would imagine is in their own best interests.
Little is as it appears at first glance in the Middle East.
MICHELLE MOSHELIAN
Givatayim, Israel
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers