I am both deeply appalled and bothered by Chen Ching-chih's (陳清池) editorial ("Taiwan belongs to the Taiwanese," July 7, page 8). It is not the basic argument that I contest but the presentation itself. I find it absolutely hypocritical of Chen to denounce an anonymous US professor for "Having strived to teach his Chinese students how to think rather than what to think," when I would dare say that the improper manner with which he editorializes fails to do justice to himself, the reader and the anecdote.
Furthermore, while I quite agree with his interpretation of temporal events, as all history is interpretive, I would contest his analysis of the 1952 San Francisco Peace Treaty.
Signed in September 1951 by 46 nations, its stipulations went into effect on April 28, 1951. The purpose of the treaty was to resolve World War II, not Taiwanese independence issues. The document itself relies heavily upon the official UN Charter of 1945 and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. The document officially states that Japan was to withdraw from Korea, Taiwan, the Kuril islands, the Pescadores, the Spratly islands, Antarctica and portions of Sakhalin and other islands adjacent to it.
Neither the Republic of China nor the People's Republic of China signed the treaty, as neither was invited to the conference. There was a second treaty between Taiwan and Japan in 1952, the Treaty of Peace with Japan that details the withdrawal of Japanese forces. Both documents set guidelines for repatriation of prisoners of war and renounce future military aggression.
The treaty does not explicitly clarify in any way, shape or form Taiwan's sovereignty, but merely makes clear Japan's withdrawal.
While I would highly espouse Taiwanese autonomy, you cannot point to documents such as the San Francisco Peace Treaty, the Treaty of Peace with Japan nor Article 77b of the UN Charter for a resolution of the matter. When you misinterpret a legal document, you set a dangerous precedent for further abuse and misinterpretation of Taiwan's legal documents.
A.M. Cambronne
United States
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Victory in conflict requires mastery of two “balances”: First, the balance of power, and second, the balance of error, or making sure that you do not make the most mistakes, thus helping your enemy’s victory. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a decisive and potentially fatal error by making an enemy of the Jewish Nation, centered today in the State of Israel but historically one of the great civilizations extending back at least 3,000 years. Mind you, no Israeli leader has ever publicly declared that “China is our enemy,” but on October 28, 2025, self-described Chinese People’s Armed Police (PAP) propaganda
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS