On Oct. 17, gunmen from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) assassinated Israeli Tourism Minister Rehavam Zeevi at a Jerusalem hotel. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon blamed Palestinian President Yasser Arafat for the killing, citing his failure to curb Palestinian terrorism. Arafat, in turn, condemned the assassination but held the Sharon government responsible, citing the provocative nature of its order to its military and intelligence agents to kill on the spot anyone suspected of attacking Israelis.
Ever since that order was given, the Israelis have killed 50 Palestinians, including Mustafa Zibri -- leader of the PFLP, the second-largest PLO faction -- on Aug. 27. The PFLP vowed to avenge Zibri's murder. In fact, the faction claimed responsibility for killing Zeevi. A vicious cycle of terrorist assassinations involving Israelis and Palestinians is underway.
On June 4, 1982, the Israeli ambassador to Britain, Shlomo Argov, was shot in London by Palestinians. Israeli troops, led by Sharon himself, took that murder as an excuse to attack Lebanon for harboring the organization responsible for the shooting. Though he might not be able to use Zeevi's death as an excuse to attack Arab countries, Sharon may send Israeli troops into autonomous Palestinian cities to hunt down suspects.
If that happens, the Sept. 26 Israeli-Palestinian ceasefire may not last. With the bloody Israeli-Palestinian conflict continuing, US diplomatic moves aimed at drawing Islamic countries to its side will definitely "require twice the effort to achieve half the result," as the old Chinese saying goes.
Meanwhile, anti-US and anti-Israel movements will continue to grow in the Islamic world, creating more difficulties for leaders of the Islamic countries that support the US military operations against Afghanistan.
If we are to be objective, the Sharon government's order is as much a terrorist act as the PFLP's assassination. It is an act of state terrorism. The US cannot have double standards -- it should oppose the terrorist acts of both sides equally. In view of the longstanding US support for Israel and the tremendous influence of the Jewish lobby within the US, however, it is most unlikely to do so.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has supported the US anti-terrorism policy, but hinted that Washington should also view anti-Russia movements within Chechnya as terrorist, including the pro-independence Chechen guer-rillas. China is supporting the US on the condition that pro-independence activists in Xinjiang be considered as terrorists. Moreover, on Oct. 17, US Secretary of State Colin Powell admitted in India, in exchange for New Dehli's support for the US anti-terrorism operations, that bombings by Kashmiri militants were indeed acts of terrorism.
The Islamic world will lose a great opportunity if it does not learn from Russia, China and India by requesting the US to stop the Israeli government's assassinations or demanding that the US define the assassinations as terrorist acts.
Sharon has recently voiced support for the establishment of a Palestinian state on the basis of the status quo. Such a proposal is unacceptable to the Palestinians. In fact, the US was not in favor of the establishment of a state of Palestine until the Sept. 11 attacks took place, which suggests that Washington has realized that terrorist atrocities are likely to continue if the Palestinian problem is not solved.
Sharon's proposed condi-tions, however, have shown that there is no hope for the establishment of a Palestinian state. That being so, the US will struggle to achieve its goal to wipe out terrorism worldwide.
David Chou is a professor of diplomacy at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its