Legislating food safety
I wish to provide some perspective about food safety (“FDA says pesticide residue found in 10 oatmeal items,” May 27, page 1). One scandal after another has erupted in the past couple of years, covering products from milk to lard oil. Food safety inspections should be a top priority for our government because it involves everyone’s health.
The Food and Drug Administration on May 26 announced that 10 types of breakfast cereals were found to contain excessive glyphosate (pesticide) residues, even though some of the oatmeal brands were imported directly from the US and not manufactured in Taiwan. This shows the need for the government to impose strict regulations on all imported food products.
The EU is reportedly planning to ban the use of glyphosate, a chemical said to cause birth defects in animals.
The government should take food safety seriously and take steps to continuously test all products before they are sold; otherwise, customers might have eaten them for a long time without knowing that they contain deleterious substances.
What is worse, it hurts consumer confidence and adds to their concerns.
Although there is still no clinical evidence that this chemical might cause death in people, it is listed as a Group 2A carcinogen by the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer.
I strongly recommend that the government propose legislation requiring all foods produced at home and abroad be clearly labeled.
The government must also strengthen regulations to thoroughly inspect all edible products to deter similar scandals from happening again.
You Yu-hsuan
Taipei
Overprotection of fraudsters?
I am strongly against the government’s overprotective attitude toward Taiwanese fraud suspects (“Taiwan protests deportation of 32 from Malaysia,” May 1, page 1).
On April 30, Taiwan filed a formal protest with the Malaysian government over the deportation to China of 32 Taiwanese who were involved in telephone fraud cases.
Due to different notions about the “one China” policy, China does not recognize Taiwan’s sovereignty. It was also pretty likely an attempt by Chinese authorities to show their strength to President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), who took office on May 20, in order to ensure its dominant role in cross-strait relations.
However, some facts and voices might be drowned out by this chaotic, political dispute.
First, Taiwan has become notorious in Asia for fraud.
“It’s so great to come back home,” said one of the suspects who was deported from Malaysia on April 15 and was soon released because of insufficient evidence.
Taiwan’s legal system imposes relatively light punishment on fraudsters and is thus not effective enough to stop the crime.
“We had given light sentences to fraudsters after they were extradited back to Taiwan, which had resulted in certain consequences,” a senior Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmaker said.
As they are criminals, we should not try so hard to protect them; even if they are Taiwanese, they have hurt innocent people.
Second, the victims of the telecommunications fraud cases were mostly Chinese and should have the right to judge these fraudsters.
One victim, a 72-year-old woman from Beijing, said she lost money for her cancer treatment and her husband’s high blood pressure and heart disease.
“I hope that Taiwanese authorities can deport these fraudsters to China as a way of comfort for us,” she reportedly said.
Political agendas should be put aside when discussing unlawful acts. We cannot ignore the rights of victims, whoever they are, or neglect the shortcomings that has long existed in our legal system.
Cindy Pan
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
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