Good global warming?
The issue of climate change discussed in your paper (“Climate deal: Now comes the far, far harder part,” Dec. 17, page 9) reminded me of a recent report in the New York Times about the potentially positive effects of climate change.
We are all aware of the distress climate change has caused around the world, including global warming, icebergs melting, the dying out of polar bears, and rising sea levels, to name a few. Each of these is closely intertwined with the way we live and our living environment.
However, global warming has had both positive and negative effects on international transport. The gradual melting of icebergs has created a profitable shortcut across the North Pole. It shortens the distance and saves time from the US to Russia or Japan to Canada, as a result of the creation of a new transportation route through the North Pole.
Moreover, it is now easier and more economic to extract and transport natural resources and energy, such as natural gas, and oil from the Scandinavian countries and Russia to other countries, because we no longer have to use icebreaker.
Despite the new convenience in transportation, there are still some negative effects. For example, global warming has caused the icebergs to keep melting, thereby reducing the living environment of walruses and polar bears. For these rare animals it is increasingly difficult to find enough food to survive, so they are forced to eat their own offspring.
As we start developing the North Pole, we are also accelerating the extinction of walruses and polar bears, not to mention the rising sea level, which has much to do with regional disaster such as the floods in Thailand.
We human beings need to reconsider whether the cost of manmade climate change is something we are really prepared to pay.
Mia Lin
Taipei
Raking in the votes
For the past year or so, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has been busy preparing a basket of goodies — financial and symbolic — to secure the maximum number of votes in the upcoming legislative and presidential elections.
Civil servants have been promised a salary raise, and older farmers were first teased with a NT$316 hike in their monthly pension and then thrown the “generous” amount of NT$1,000.
The tariffs on baby formula have been lowered, sex workers and their advocates got their wish when a new law legalizing the establishment of red-light zones went into effect, and parents should be “elated” that the Ministry of Education’s introduction of the Four Books will return a multitude of errant young people back to the path of righteousness.
In the midst of all this, more than 5,000 people find themselves ringing in the new year on unpaid leave according to official statistics, with even more scared of losing their jobs altogether. Many parents are struggling to put food on the table and lowering tariffs for baby formula cannot offset the dire financial straits that some parents find themselves in. At the same time, while red-light districts are yet to be established, a law that would penalize both sex workers and their clients is yet to be enforced.
Government employees might deserve a salary raise, but as they already have job security, wouldn’t those extra funds be better used to throw a lifeline to those who are struggling to make ends meet?
Are the police really going to cast their nets to ensnare the poor fornicating cab driver? Are we going to establish red-light zones when the dim light districts — sometimes with the blessing of law enforcement — are much more lucrative?
Are we going to starve the escort services, and the hostess bars, the massage parlors and the night clubs that basically serve as store fronts for prostitution? Are we going to starve the many motels that dot the country? Are the Four Books really going to make a dent in correcting deviant behavior?
The answer is no. But the basket of goodies will certainly be cause for celebration if it rakes in the needed number of votes, and the big fish benefit greatly — yet again.
Mo Reddad
Greater Kaohsiung
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath