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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of