Democracy and jungle law
During his visit to Taiwan, German theologian Jurgen Moltmann said something that, until March 20, I actually believed: there has not been any true democratic government in history that has begun a war. Before the US invasion of Iraq, it seemed to be a true statement.
When a people govern themselves democratically, war becomes difficult. Usually the majority will not lean towards aggression against another country. Diplomacy and compromise are chosen instead. There is too much to lose in a war.
When the US launched its attack, a big hole in this Moltmann's statement opened. What was supposed to be the leader of the free world initiated a war against another country for quite ambiguous reasons: owning, developing and trading weapons of mass destruction. Today there is no evidence of these weapons, but propaganda works, Nowa war to" liberate" the Iraqi nation from its "evil" leadership is coming to a close.
Quite a lot of people saw a hidden agenda: to gain control of Iraq's oil and get a foot hold in the Middle East influence and everything got even more confusing.
The new world order is not that different from the age of European empires. There is just one difference: the empire is now headed by the US. Just as with the Spainish, British, French, Dutch and German empires, the US empire has to exert fluence all over the globe. Even though some European nations have shown resistance to the coalition of three nations that invaded Iraq, they still want to have a part of Iraq's scraps.
Every empire has its dawn, zenith and dusk. This one will, too. I had a friend who told me that the Achilles' heel of her country, the US, is its own social disparities. It is the richest country in the world but also the one with greater inequality. There are expensive mega-prisons which are disproportionately composed of African-Americans and inner-city ghettos.
The promotion of democracy in the world and the UN system was aimed at building a league of equal nations, but it begun with a flaw. Some have more power in decision-making, vetoing and resource allocation and in the end, although it has been weakened, the real world continues using the only law that we all seem to respect: the law of the jungle. This is the law that the US seems to be following when dealing with other nations.
Francisco Carin Garcia
Taishan, Taipei County
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS