Free people, free choices
Taiwan is a sovereign state populated by a free people and has the right to conduct referendums as part of its legal and constitutional development.
China has no right to threaten Taiwan simply because the government and the citizenry of Taiwan choose to exercise the right to conduct elections, propose and pass laws and conduct other affairs inherent in the sovereign business of a free people living in dignity.
The referendum is a simple process that will decide whether China should be asked to turn away from the threat of war and remove 500 missiles aimed at Taiwan and its people.
This peaceful nation and its citizens have invested huge sums of money, set up a large number of companies, and sent tens of thousands of its best graduates to work in China. Surely these actions are not those of just a peaceful people but of a country which encourages China's development.
These are not actions which warrant any kind of hostility.
Common sense requires that Taiwan makes known its reasons for requesting that China turn away these instruments of destruction and death and that the Chinese withdraw threats of war against its peaceful neighbor.
Such requests occur within a civil society in a process called referendum, a simple and civil act based in law by the rightful inhabitants of a state. There is no room whatsoever for any official in the US to express doubts regarding this exercise of sovereignty.
Eric Hands
Seattle, Washington
Sequester SARS researchers
SARS researchers should be sequestered. Not sequestered within Taiwan as currently proposed, but within the research facility itself.
SARS research facilities should be divided into two areas. One area would be for hands-on research. The other area would be for computer modeling, desk work, library research, administration, recreation, and so on, but without any contact with the virus.
Researchers should spend at least 10 days in the second area after working in the first before being allowed to leave the facility.
During Taiwan's recent SARS scare, such a system would have restricted exposure to a relatively small number of people already aware of the need to take full precautions at all times, resulting in huge cost savings.
Stuart Saunders
Neihu
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