US drug war `corrupt'
It is obvious that the US Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) corrupt drug war drives the corrupt drug policies of many countries around the world, including those in Latin America ("Latin America remains fragile," March 24, page 9). The corrupt leaders of these countries nevertheless pretend that their corrupt policies are sovereign and independent.
The thing that makes drugs and dealers dangerous and violent is the drug war. The prohibition itself is what allows these dealers to exist in the first place. By declaring a war on them, their businesses and their goods, the US government surely in-vites them to respond in kind.
Only one thing is going to separate the dealers from their huge profits and it isn't the government's war. It is decriminalization, legalization, regulation and an end to the government's domestic war on drugs.
Drug dealers, warlords, kingpins and guerillas fear only one thing. They don't fear the DEA, CIA, FBI or any other law enforcement agency, politicians or armies, because they either already own them or have them outgunned. What they do fear is legalization and regulation.
The government rarely lists "victory" as an objective in its expensive and oppressive war. When it does spout its "zero tolerance, total victory" rhetoric, how many of your readers actually believe it? How many actually believe that this year's multi-billion-dollar drug war budget will be the one that will achieve total victory after decades of billion-dollar budgets have failed?
Law enforcement, customs, the prison service and military-industrial complex, the drug-testing industry, the drug-treatment industry, the INS, the CIA, the FBI, the DEA and the politicians themselves are probably unable to live without the budget appropriated to them for the war, not to mention the invisible profits, bribery, corruption and forfeiture benefits that prohibition affords them.
The drug war also promotes, justifies and perpetuates racist enforcement policies and is eroding many freedoms that are supposed to be inalienable under the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Myron Von Hollingsworth
Fort Worth, Texas
Wrong targets
It was with incredulity that I read about the "success" of Taipei traffic officials in handing out fines to over 2,000 motorcyclists in an attempt to clamp down on illegal lane swapping, among other things ("Strict traffic crackdown underway in Taipei City," March 2, page 2).
It amazes me how traffic-unfriendly roads in Taiwan are to motorcyclists. This is so ironic, since there is supposedly one motorcycle to every two persons in the country. The assault on motorcyclists underlines, more than anything, the inability of traffic officials to enforce more essentials laws that are applicable to drivers of cars and larger vehicles.
Why don't they use their resources and efforts to tackle 18-wheelers who go through red traffic lights? Why are efforts not directed at drivers who adopt the "bigger goes first" mentality and literally muscle motorcyclists out of the way? The traffic department needs to prioritize more judiciously.
There is no success in constantly harassing motorcyclists when there are bigger and more crucial problems created by drivers. Yes, illegal lane swapping is dangerous, but so are those large trucks and the third-world road culture that leads to the above-mentioned infringements. In fact, the latter poses a greater threat to public safety.
The time has come for motorcyclists to get a sense of ownership when it comes to the roads, and to have that sense with a greater level of security.
Brandon Stoltenkamp
Kaohsiung
Reduce traffic light periods
A simple way to reduce the number of traffic accidents that result from people jumping red lights, would be to simply reduce the time it takes for the lights to change. It has often baffled me why the lights are programmed to test the patience of even the most snail-like of motorists.
Reducing the waiting time would reduce impatience, speed up traffic and encourage people to wait their turn -- opposed to the insanity that one witnesses every day on Taiwan's streets.
Adam Rose
London
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
RSS