Vote with your free will
The recent American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) announcement that Taiwan has been nominated for the US’ visa-waiver program (“Taiwan gets US visa-waiver nomination,” Dec. 23, page 1) is a biasing move and it has added another perturbation to next month’s elections.
In the 2008 presidential election, the AIT made a similar mistake by announcing that Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) did not have a US green card, although many people still believe he has. Advocating fair elections, the US should remain neutral. The nomination for the visa-waiver program is not so urgent that it had to be announced at this time.
If the US approves the nomination, it is because Taiwanese have credibility. They should thank themselves — not the incumbent or previous administration.
In addition to the US announcement of the visa-waiver nomination, several other perturbations might affect the elections. These include Beijing urging Taiwanese businesspersons in China to vote for Ma, a 50 percent discount on their airfare to return to vote, the smear campaign against Democratic Progressive Party presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), an imbalance in party funds, and possible vote-buying and betting on the results.
All voters should ignore these disturbing factors and cast their votes with their free will for their own sake and for the future of their homeland.
The sustainability of democracy and the normalization of Taiwan depend on next month’s elections.
Charles Hong
Columbus, Ohio
A local angle
In the run-up to next month’s elections, although it is interesting to see how the two main political parties continuously attack each other about procedures and any way that the other may possibly be breaking the law, aren’t Taiwanese more interested in the political decisions and political strategies that may involve real issues?
Or is how to trip the other party up the only important thing in elections?
There seems to be a lack of information about policy decisions, plans or even ideas that reflect the distinctions between the main parties. Also lacking is any real effort to focus on key issues in an intellectual manner or through deeper discussion. Instead, taking up most of the front pages are oversized photos of presidential candidates and trivial information, such as who gave Ma some vegetables.
Please, less drivel and more intellectual debate on core electoral issues. Here is a radical idea — instead of Americans speculating from the US, why not have some Taiwanese intellectuals speculating from inside the country on how the election will effect Taiwanese?
disillusioned
(name withheld)
Speaking the truth
It was with a certain amount of disbelief and disgust that I read about the remarks of Taipei City Councilor Angela Ying (應曉薇) (“Activists slam ‘cleaning’ up of homeless,” Dec. 24, page 4). It is hard to believe that she could show such a lack of empathy and caring for the disadvantaged of Taipei.
The words she used were no joke! They were coarse, crude and totally without feeling. However, it also proves that the divide between the “haves” and the “have nots” is widening, and those who have care less and less about their more unfortunate brethren.
This is not just something peculiar to Taiwan. The US is seeing that gap widen every day.
Maybe Ying should think of the old adage: “There but by the grace of God,” and then hold her tongue when she is feeling particularly fortunate.
Tom Kuleck
Taichung City
Righting wrongs
I receive the European edition of Time magazine at home and I was shocked to see Taiwan shown as part of China in its geographic illustration, as Dan Bloom reported in his recent article (“Setting confused ‘Time’ straight,” Dec. 28, page 8).
I actually did write an e-mail to Time to signal this obvious error. Although my letter was not published, I was pleased to see that the error had been corrected on the magazine’s Web site and that Jesse Chaflin’s letter was published in the Dec. 12 issue of the European edition.
Dan Bloom’s statement that “his letter did not appear in Time’s other international editions for North America and Europe” is therefore wrong and should be corrected.
Joseph Allard
Luxembourg
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