Did Jackie Chan (
To compare Chan to Vladimir Zhirinovsky is almost as absurd and raises some questions, once again, to the intentions of the journalist. Over the years, Zhirinovsky has advocated lots of strange stuff, like the reunification of the Soviet Union (including Alaska) or the invasion of several neighboring countries. His cant is nasty, to say the least, fully misogynistic, jingoistic and anti-Semitic. That is why Zhirinovsky's belief that Russian women should be punished for marrying foreigners and in particular Chinese foreigners is hardly surprising. What is surprising is that he's landed on the front-page of this newspaper.
He has about as much credibility in Russia as People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) or Li Ao (李熬) has in this country.
Very few if any here in Taiwan would even know who Zhirinovsky is. Chan, on the other hand, is an icon (albeit a fading one). His comments seem a bit goofy, I admit, but I still can't see by this front-page article how they come as "a blow." Actually, I find the last two paragraphs more disturbing. "[Chan's] comments are unlikely to meet with the approval from China's growing army of bachelors, who are estimated to reach 40 million within 20 years and who face fierce competition in finding a mate from their own countrymen."
What is the journalist trying to say? It's wrong for Russians like Zhirinovsky to be protective of what they perceive to be "their woman" but is it not equally wrong of Chan to suggest that his countrymen do the opposite? Shanghai ladies, Taiwanese ladies, ladies everywhere, it is not necessary for you to worry about "gender imbalances caused by the large number abortions and one-child policy."
Marry who you want to, no matter where he comes from, and don't look back.
Patrick Cowsill
Taipei
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS