Snap back to reality
Dennis Hickey’s criticism (Letters, May 30, page 8) of Gerrit van der Wees’ article (“The US will continue to support Taiwan,” May 16, page 8) reeks of the perverse logic and myopic perspective of an academic angling for support from moneyed interests in China and perhaps even the US.
He admits that Taiwan is a democracy, but since in his argument it allegedly has no strategic value to the US, it can be sacrificed.
Going further, he argues that the US can still profit economically from Taiwan even if its democratic values are sacrificed to China’s autocracy, thus the US should not be concerned.
Finally, as he criticizes van der Wees for trying to “prove” his love for Taiwan, Hickey has no compunction about showing his disdain for Taiwan as an ally of the US and for its democracy. Somehow, he concludes we can all love Taiwan and at the same time sacrifice it to China — for moneyed interests of course. What passport does he hold?
Jerome Keating
Taipei
It is my belief that it is Dennis Hickey who could use a good dose of reality (Letters, May 30, page 8). He also ought to learn a few lessons in civility and common courtesy.
I wonder how many “foreign policy analysts” there are who would call Gerrit van der Wees (“The US will continue to support Taiwan,” May 16, page 8) a “great white father,” who can no longer objectively analyze the danger-fraught, highly complex trilateral relationship between Washington, Taipei and Beijing from a proper perspective, because he has “gone native.”
In fact, I believe that Hickey owes van der Wees an apology.
By using such racist expressions as “going native” and “great white fathers” (I think that someone has perhaps seen the movie Dances With Wolves once too often), Hickey is not only displaying his ignorance in general, he also betrays his specific ignorance regarding van der Wees.
Previously, van der Wees worked as an aerospace engineer for the Dutch government on its space policy. In 2005, he moved to Washington to work on issues that concerned Taiwan. His wife is Taiwanese and since 1980, he and his wife have worked sub rosa on human rights in Taiwan via their newsletter, Taiwan Communique, www.taiwandc.org.
In 1980, Taiwan was still under martial law. Taiwan has the “distinction” of having had the longest period of martial law of any country in the world; only in 1987 was martial law lifted by then-president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國).
Therefore, for seven years, this courageous couple took no little risk in struggling for social and human rights in Taiwan.
Van der Wees is spot on in giving his reasons why the US should support Taiwan, especially when he writes: “First and foremost, Taiwan is a democracy ... If the US wants democracy to prevail in East Asia, it had better stand by its allies.”
Now, let’s compare Van der Wees’ words with what Hickey scribbles in his contemptible, despicable letter, namely: “Yes, Taiwan is a democracy, but it has little or no strategic value to the US.”
First, Hickey is dead wrong to state that Taiwan is of “little or no strategic value to the US.” Taiwan is of paramount strategic importance, not only to the US, but to many other countries.
However, it is Hickey’s sneering, cavalier dismissal of Taiwan’s democracy that I find most shocking and sickening.
The cherished and precious ideals of liberty, democracy and freedom supposedly form the very bedrock of US society. The US founding fathers put their own lives at risk. Any one of them — if caught — faced being hanged by order of Great Britain’s King George III.
And then, there is the issue of honor — national honor. It is honor that will compel the US to come to Taiwan’s aid, should the country ever be attacked or threatened. The US is duty-bound by the Taiwan Relations Act.
Yes, I do believe that — for his racist remarks — Hickey owes van der Wees an apology. The former owes the latter an apology also for his risible and condescending order that van der Wees “do his homework.” It is Hickey who should “bone up on” his US history — the new republic’s founding fathers and the ideas and ideals that formed the basis of their policies.
Michael Scanlon
East Hartford, Connecticut
Tighten the food ship
The scale of food contaminated by di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and other similar chemicals in Taiwan is astonishing. Many well-known food and drug producers have also been implicated in this scandal.
The victims are numerous, the health cost immeasurable and the reputation of Taiwan’s food industry seriously tarnished.
The whole issue is inexcusable and it has proven that Taiwan is backward in its food safety practices. Since the addition of plasticizers has been practised by many food producers for many decades, this has become a culture in itself.
It is hard to imagine that so many food experts and professionals in the Taiwanese food industry failed to recognize and stop this practice until it was accidentally discovered by an analyst at the Food and Drug Administration.
The competition in the food business is harsh and its greed is unstoppable. These factors drive away the honest producers.
That’s why government is there to hold producers accountable. The way to solve this issue once and for all is to enact strict and verifiable regulations in Taiwan. Food additives in addition to emulsifiers have to be regulated as well. Otherwise, this episode is not going to be the end of the food scare story.
Yang Ji-charng
Ohio
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Owing to the combined majority of the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), the legislature last week voted to further extend the current session to the end of next month, prolonging the session twice for a total of 211 days, the longest in Taiwan’s democratic history. Legally, the legislature holds two regular sessions annually: from February to May, and from September to December. The extensions pushed by the opposition in May and last week mean there would be no break between the first and second sessions this year. While the opposition parties said the extensions were needed to
RSS