`One China' fans ignore rights
The letter by Arthur Li (Letters, Aug. 15, page 8) is accurate in its assessment of Taiwan's history. The US has legally handled the Republic of China with kid gloves for over 50 years, but it is time those gloves came off. It is not wise for Washington to ignore the mounting voices calling for the alienable right of Taiwan to be protected.
The San Francisco Peace Treaty custodial rights of Taiwan, as mentioned by Li, are rooted in the basic civil rights of the 1898 Treaty of Paris. Currently, there are 4 million Americans living under these basic civil rights protections. The former US Trust Territory was also governed by the San Francisco Treaty and its 100,000 island citizens were under these American judicial protection of the very same basic civil rights. However, US former secretary of state Henry Kissinger never gave a damn about them when he was in office.
Meanwhile, Kissinger pushed for the signing of the Shanghai Communique. The question of South Vietnam and Taiwan were quietly abandoned on Feb. 28, 1972. But Taiwan refuses to go away silently.
Thus Kissinger proteges of the "one China" policy have continued to be busy in their serious civil-rights trampling of Pacific islanders protected under treaty.
Former US ambassador to the UN Richard Holbrooke has a legacy dating from 1979 that inspired the human-rights clause in the Taiwan Relations Act.
But then, his enduring calls for the Fourth Communique on Taiwan have been more than innocent commentary. Since 1999, he has assumed civilian sector employment with the American International Group (AIG).
AIG is the leader of the China corporate lobby and is the only major underwriter of political risk insurance which is needed by 300 American corporations lobbying for China membership in the WTO.
After 1996, the Overseas Political Insurance Corp (OPIC) stopped underwriting political insurance for any US investments in China.
AIG was first encouraged by Kissinger to fill the void left by OPIC. Taiwan is still covered by OPIC; it continues to be an important US government agency to the Taiwan economy.
Stephen Solarz was the leading "one China" policy adviser to former vice president Al Gore, and it was chronicled by author Bill Trippett in the Red Dragon Rising and Year of the Rat. The theft of nuclear technology and the transfers of technology by the former US president Bill Clinton insiders leaves a foul odor in the air around these self-appointed commissars of "one China." Solarz resigned from Congress under allegations of triad connections in Hong Kong.
Stanley Roth was the leading "one China" commissar under the Clinton administration. He started as a staffer under Congressman Stephen Solarz and he later dealt with prolonged Micronesian negotiations for independence in the 1980s. The concept of basic civil rights is wasted on Roth as his speeches have publicly disavowed the human rights clause in Taiwan Relations Act.
Perhaps he should be publicly reminded about those "undefined" civil rights protections of Micronesia. Under the San Francisco Treaty, they were first judicially defined in 1900 by Article 9 as "undefined" civil rights of islanders stemming from Treaty of Paris ratification in 1898. (See Downes v. Bidwell).
Then there is the odious Dr. Kenneth Lieberthal. Reports by Bill Gertz of the Washington Times suggested his professional advocacy of the tacit approval of the PLA invasion of Kinmen and Matsu in 1999. Lieberthal's continuing statements to the press on Chinese leader Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) are troubling.
It seems the commissars of "one China" policy will never cease to be apologists for the human-rights abusers in Beijing. Then this is not a surprise in light their poor track record under American law for the civil rights of Pacific islanders.
I am not able to fathom how the commissars of "one China" policy can sleep at night. This behavior is not innocent speech nor abstract exercises of intellect when the civil rights of 23 million people are being willfully ignored because of these policy commissars.
Arthur Li is very right about Taiwan's status and the Taiwan civil rights issue will not rest in peace.
Jeff Geer
Manaus, Brazil
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The National Development Council (NDC) on Wednesday last week launched a six-month “digital nomad visitor visa” program, the Central News Agency (CNA) reported on Monday. The new visa is for foreign nationals from Taiwan’s list of visa-exempt countries who meet financial eligibility criteria and provide proof of work contracts, but it is not clear how it differs from other visitor visas for nationals of those countries, CNA wrote. The NDC last year said that it hoped to attract 100,000 “digital nomads,” according to the report. Interest in working remotely from abroad has significantly increased in recent years following improvements in
RSS