Lu's schemes are vile
Vice President Annette Lu (
It is highly inappropriate in this day and age for a role model to advocate the transmigration of minority peoples. Her patron-izing proposal seems ignorant of the foolhardy schemes of the past that have seen indigenous people treated as pawns. Like [former Soviet dictator Josef] Stalin's "minority enclaves," or Canada's Inuit "relocations" and "reservations," or South Africa's apartheid "homelands," Lu's schemes conjure up nightmarish images of how the majority has treated the minority.
This is the second vile scheme that Lu has concocted for Taiwan's minorities, the other being AIDS villages for HIV/AIDS victims.
Both ideas deserve to be firmly tossed into the dust heap of ill-conceived plans and the current administration needs to take proactive actions that demonstrate bottom-up consultation with the public, rather than engaging in reckless top-down policy brainstorming.
David Sadoway
Taipei
Stardom no excuse for A-Mei
The singer Chang Hui-mei (張惠妹), also known as A-mei (阿妹), has been examined under a magnifying glass. She could have been her politically insensitive self if she was no celebrity.
But as someone who makes millions of bucks across Taiwan, China and Hong Kong, every aspect of her life, including her private romantic relationships, is judged by the media and the public.
A-mei excuses herself from being political because she is a singer. But everyone has more than one identity: No one is two-dimensional.
She is a singer, but she is also an adult who is expected to have thoughts and stand up for what she believes. This does not necessarily include making a stand on how cross-strait issues should be resolved, but just standing up for her choice and her right to sing her national anthem.
But she doesn't. Being a singer is not a blanket excuse for not having a mind of her own or a retreat from the world of "grown-ups." And no, we don't "all" know that "singers should not be involved in politics," as A-mei said.
Does being an entertainer take away her right to express her stance?
Or, if it is indeed her right, just as it is for Taiwanese businessmen in China, to avoid any political involvement in order to continue making money in China, should she be free to choose insulation from political involvement so that she can sell records in China?
Of course, Vice President Annette Lu's comment that A-mei could choose singing when there is a war between the two governments is far out.
But judgment of Lu's comment, which once again lacks common sense, should be separated from an entertainer's right to express their opinions about controversial issues.
If it is an entertainer's "right," then I guess A-mei can choose to take it up, or forgo it. But as someone who has enjoyed her performances, I despise A-mei for bowing to China's illogical criticism about what her rights should be. Any reasonable person should be able to disagree with this criticism, and if I were in her shoes I would stand by what I have chosen to do. But that would be me.
Weini Wen
Taipei
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS