In defense of the unpopular
Thank you Georg Woodman and thank you to the Taipei Times for always publishing letters with diverse opinions.
The words expressed in his letter (“A god among mere mortals,” June 5, page 8) draw an impartial portrait of a majority of Taiwanese society, more precisely their drivers and riders of all kinds (buses, cars, scooters and even bikes).
Georg Woodman’s straightforwardness also shows that he is concerned about Taiwan and its people (aren’t we all, if we decided to come here?) and, as I do too, he toys with the hope of seeing this country embrace a brighter perspective.
Nearly a year ago, in a letter published in this newspaper, I was still debating “in vain” about the Taipei’s traffic. I now agree with Woodman that “social conduct” is a more appropriate topic for discussion.
I happen to express the same sincerity in my conversations when I am invited to give my opinion about Taiwan. I have gathered that this is not the best for being a crowd-pleaser, but I always conclude by stating that the Taiwanese working class deserves a better environment, better living conditions and a more hopeful future. I mean it.
Looking at how the young generation is straining under the pressure of long working shifts for meager wages, commuting daily on public transport, behaving nicely and patiently with an obvious sense of civility that you will no longer see on a subway in Paris — it all still surprises me and touches my heart.
This is all compared with the other part of the society which appalls me: The selfish old-school followers whose views are anchored to the past with no vision or ambition for their country and who justify their obnoxious behaviour by claiming it is their democratic right. A democracy for which they did not even have to fight, basically these people are deeply individualistic.
My opinion will no doubt surely raise objections from many locals who will often skirt around the issue by replying: “Why do you stay here then?”
I have my personal reasons to be here and this is absolutely not the point. Too many Taiwanese favor this kind of argument, which allows them to simply dismiss any foreigner who happens to hold a view which is critical of their society.
Well, if we followed such reasoning in our respective countries, then foreign residents who use their right to express criticism there would be few in number.
I still feel tenderness for many Taiwanese. I feel compassion for those who are helpless and so prone to pessimism, but I also feel disillusioned when I look at the other half of the citizens who are inconsiderate, self-satisfied and self-indulgent, and who do not possess even the slightest propensity for self-criticism and who deliberately waste the great potential that this island has to offer.
The “betterment of Taiwanese society” still has a long way to go.
Alexis Sanders
Paris
If you do not like it, lump it
In response to Mr Georg Woodman’s recent letter, I would like to say that as a longtime visitor to Taiwan, who is also married to a wonderful Taiwanese woman, in my humble opinion it is time for you to take your pompous attitude and simply fold up your tent and go home ... wherever that might be.
It is people just like you who give Westerners an undeserved “black eye.” You are a visitor. Maybe you are on a resident visa, but you are still a guest in Taiwan. Act like it.
You remind me of a nurse I met who spent several weeks in China teaching English. Her biggest complaint was: “All they served was Chinese food.”
My advice to you is: Grow up, be more tolerant of your fellow man and enjoy the wonderful island that is Taiwan.
If that is not possible, however, go home. I am sure you will not find the same beauty and tolerance that you do in Taiwan where you come from.
Tom Kuleck
Greater Taichung
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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