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
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then