Links wouldn't stop crashes
Imagine my amusement to a recent article which suggested that opposition officials have used direct links as a solution to China Airlines's (CAL) troubles ("Yu says despite opposition claims, direct links must wait," May 29, page 3). While we don't know the cause of the crash, there is some evidence to suggest that there needs to be procedural changes in Taiwan to lessen the probability of future air disasters.
However, speaking from common sense (as well as from experience as a pilot), that answer doesn't rest in the direct links.
Chinese officials suggest that not adopting direct links after this disaster is "tantamount" to criminal conduct. What exactly do these officials mean? Are they implying that direct links would have somehow prevented this crash? Surely China isn't trying to convince me that flying to Hong Kong is more dangerous than to Xiamen, Beijing, Shang-hai or other Chinese cities.
Flying is flying, and instead of crashing on its way to Hong Kong, CI611 would have crashed on its way to Shanghai. If anything, I'd take my chances flying to Hong Kong because there are no air defense batteries in Hong Kong. And what's more, I'd rather crash outside of Chinese territory because imagine the red tape you would have to go through in the Beijing bureaucracy in order to get rescued inside Chinese territory.
"Pan blue" legislators have also suggested that direct links would somehow solve the problem. Ignorant statements such as these only serve to reaffirm my opinion that the quality of Taiwan's legislators is sorely lacking. It doesn't take a doctorate to win office -- nor, apparently, does it take much common sense. If anything, the only way direct links would solve the problem would be because all the ex-air force mainlanders would retire to their home provinces and leave Taiwan for those that actually appreciate her. I guess that would solve CAL's woes.
Or, could it be that both the Chinese officials and "pan blue" camp are superstitious and somehow believe that flying to Hong Kong is bad luck?
No, as someone suggested, the solution to CAL's woes lies in privatization and introducing competitive forces into an organization that is otherwise a retirement farm for air force and other senior military officers. If we want to focus on supersti-tion, then I would suggest re-flagging the airline as "Formosa Air" and painting the planes green. Oh, and maybe hire pilots that don't treat their 747s as F-104s. Civilians planes don't have as responsive flight controls and a tri-cycle configured landing gear will scrape its tail if you pull up too fast -- even an amateur like me knows that. Those would be solutions to CAL's woes, not some imaginary benefits derived from direct links or superstition.
Ryan J. Shih
Stanford, California
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
RSS