Making the case for Bernie
Dear Americans,
This is a response to Joshua Chengyung Fu’s letter (Letter to Sanders supporters, p.8, March 19).
Fu writes that some US Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders supporters, or “Bernie Bros,” have said they would not vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton.
There is no such thing as the “Bernie Bros.” The “Bernie Bros” myth began with just two tweets from two individual users. One of the tweets cited comes from someone who is not even a Sanders supporter.
Fu is also concerned that US Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump might become president.
If you are concerned about Trump then vote for Sanders, because the polls indicate that Sanders would beat Trump in the US presidental election.
Finally, Fu says that Clinton and Sanders supporters have the same goals.
We do not.
Clinton wants to expand US President Barack Obama’s healthcare reforms — known as “Obamacare” — to more people.
Sanders wants to make healthcare available to everyone, just as it is in Taiwan, Canada, Europe and Japan.
Clinton wants to make studying at university less expensive.
Sanders wants to make it free just, as it is in England (sic), France, Germany and Scandinavia.
According to polls, the US states due to vote next all favor Sanders. Sanders is set to win the nomination and the presidency.
To think that the choice of Clinton is inevitable, that Sanders is too liberal and that the US is not ready for a “socialist” president is similar to saying that in 2008 Clinton was the inevitable choice and that Obama was too liberal and the US was not ready for a black president.
My fellow Americans, please register to vote at the American Institute in Taiwan, then vote for Sanders.
Andres Chang
Taipei
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