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
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