Death penalty backfires
Taiwan executed six people [on Friday], not — as Minister of Justice Luo Ying-shay (羅瑩雪) blatantly said untruthfully — out of due process, but out of political whim. Sadly, many Taiwanese think this is a good thing and that justice has been served. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Alex Tsai (蔡正元) should apologize to his parents for wasting their money. He attended some of the world’s best universities and proudly brags to have learned nothing from it. Morality is universal, not “white.”
I am still trying to comprehend the irrelevant blather spouted by Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) and doubt I ever will. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) also claims to be against capital punishment, but hides behind flaccid statements that Taiwan is not ready.
There is a predominant thought in Taiwan that Taiwanese are somehow special, that cultural differences hold Taiwanese to a different morality. The same tripe was being spouted about democracy in the nation 30 years ago and has been proven untrue. People erroneously believe that capital punishment is a deterrent, despite the total lack of evidence to back those claims. If comments from the alleged murderer of the schoolgirl and those of the MRT murder suspect are true and that they committed the crimes as “suicide by cop” attempts, then capital punishment actually causes crime.
Bill McGregor
Yuanlin
Interpreting the ‘status quo’
During her visit to Washington, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) became the first Taiwanese presidential candidate to have officially entered the US Department of State and the White House on business rather than sightseeing.
Both meetings were behind closed doors, but Tsai delivered a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on Wednesday last week, covering social security, defense, US relations and international participation, cross-strait issues and new Asian values. She identified her vision as a leader of Taiwan to the US, to Asia and the world.
During the question-and-answer session following her speech, former US assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs Kurt Campbell asked: “Do you believe in the current environment that the US, Taiwan and China have roughly the same definition of what comprises the status quo?”
Tsai said: “I’m sure that China, the US and Taiwan have different interpretations of that term, but I’m pretty sure that despite our differences in the interpretation of that term, we should all agree that maintaining a peaceful and stable relationship across the Taiwan Strait serves the interests of everybody, and whatever the interpretation of that term, this should be a part of that interpretation.”
Reviewing her presentation and answers, Tsai has demonstrated her knowledge and understanding of the “status quo” and she made clear that the difference between Taiwan and China means Taiwan does not belong to China and that it fully complies with the US’ one China policy, the Three Communiques dealing with the China issue and the Taiwan Relations Act governing the US-Taiwan relationship.
US Department of State officials said in a post-meeting press conference the US is committed to supporting Taiwan’s security, economy and freedom from threat based on the Taiwan Relations Act and will help Taiwan attain dignity and respect in the international community.
Hopefully, the term “status quo” is clear to all Taiwanese as it defines the existing state of affairs. The “status quo” was first mentioned in the US’ Taiwan policy based upon the three communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act and it has now been adopted by Tsai. She was criticized by both former DNP chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) and former presidential office secretary-general Chen Shih-meng (陳師孟), who both interpret the “status quo” as maintaining a standstill.
Chinese Ambassador to the US Cui Tiankai (崔天凱) said Tsai should first pass the test of 1.3 billion Chinese and ask the opinion of “compatriots” on the other side of the Taiwan Strait. What a joke. Would Beijing accept Tsai’s visit in her capacity as Taiwanese presidential candidate? Why would a Taiwanese presidential candidate need the approval of 1.3 billion Chinese before visiting the US? Tsai said her candidacy is subject to the approval of 23 million Taiwanese.
Taiwan is not part of the Republic of China or China. Taiwanese should elect a Taiwanese president, not a Chinese one. Are you ready?
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
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