Challenge of transition
To smoothly transfer political power over an exceptionally long waiting period of four months, outgoing President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and president-elect Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) met on March 30 to discuss the transition. Ma said he would support new legislation on presidential transition under the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution and Tsai said that there must be a law to ensure smooth and peaceful transition of power.
The meeting focused on pensions, diplomacy, employment, energy and the South China Sea, while the so-called “1992 consensus” was not even mentioned.
The cross-strait issue is Ma’s favorite topic and proudest achievement, but due to time limitations there was no discussion, so Tsai had no chance to ask him what he had promised at the meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in November last year.
Ma’s administration has tightly locked every effort toward the “one China” principle and took China as the main entrance for Taiwan to the international arena. Ma assumes that is the only way for Tsai to survive if she wants to comply with her promise of abiding with the constitutional system.
It is a shame that Ma has been president for eight years and still has not realized the real “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait: that Taiwan is not a part of China.
The ROC holds sovereignty neither over Taiwan nor China; it is an merely an exiled government of China.
Therefore, Tsai’s inauguration statement should express that she only represents Taiwanese voters when ruling a nation that has nothing to do with the sovereignty of China and that the “status quo” means that Taiwan is not a part of China. Tsai represents Taiwanese voters. Taiwan and China are not the same nation.
Ma has left Tsai a broken nation where children are afraid of being beheaded while walking on street. The nation needs fundamental changes. Hopefully, Tsai can lead the public to overcome the challenges and implement reforms to make Taiwan a secure place for children to grow up happily, for adults to work successfully and for seniors to retire comfortably.
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
End people’s isolation
I did not have to read Douglas Habecker’s letter (Letters, April 1, page 8) twice to think that his assessment of Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was on the mark.
When reading the article in question (“Ko Wen-je calls on wardens to arrange more social events,” March 30, page 2), I sat nodding in total agreement with what the mayor said.
By contrast, I was appalled that several groups missed no chance to use the tragic incident to further their cause. The restraint and composure shown by the mother, who witnessed the horrific event and was unable to save her daughter, during a TV interview is something we should learn from.
As for Ko, he is right. In the smartphone-using, everyone-is-connected world, too many people now live virtual lives and pay little or no attention to what is going on right beside them. So, getting people out to meet in person at small neighbourhood events is a marvellous idea.
As the mayor said, harsh punishments for crimes like this are no deterrent. Such acts are committed by people isolated and detached from society. They do not think about the consequences of their actions or the punishment that could follow. Some might even hope for the harshest punishment to end their, real or perceived, suffering.
Only by more social interaction can such individuals be brought out of their isolation and be detected. So, judging less and interacting more are, in my opinion, and as the mayor says, better ways to at least try to avoid similar tragedies.
Geert Anthonis
Kaohsiung
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