Airport amenities
As a researcher who has investigated the role of self-selected leisure reading for the past three decades, I was, at first, very happy to see that there is a reading zone at the Taipei airport (at Gate C-5, Eva Airlines).
Our research has concluded that leisure reading has a powerful effect on both first and second-language development: Those who read a great deal on their own develop large vocabularies, good writing style, better grammar, and learn a lot about a wide variety of topics. The reading zone at C-5 seems to be a strong endorsement of pleasure reading.
My inspection of the area on two occasions, about 10 days apart, showed, however, that nobody sitting in the area was reading any of the books displayed.
I noticed that the waiting passengers were not sitting around bored. They had their own reading material, were talking, or were busy with their computers.
My concern is that the lack of interest in the reading zone (admittedly based on two brief observations) will be interpreted as a lack of interest in reading.
This is not the correct interpretation. There are good reasons why waiting passengers were not reading the material displayed.
About 99 percent of what was displayed were books, and most were novels. There were very few magazines. Reading zone users are not allowed to take books out of the reading zone area: They have to be returned. Travelers waiting for a flight are not going to start reading a novel that they certainly cannot finish during the typical waiting period.
Taipei airport should keep the reading zone, but include more “quick reads,” especially magazines. Passengers should be allowed to borrow books and return them at their destination.
Travelers about to get on long flights who forgot to pack a book will be grateful. And publishers might want to donate the opening chapter of some of their newest books, especially books available in airport bookstores at the passengers’ destination.
Stephen Krashen
Professor emeritus,
University of Southern California
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