Addressing common history
In the era of globalization, characterized by widespread access to the Internet and social media, swift rhythm of life, mass production and rapid consumption of the news, it is relatively easy to fall into the trap of following some simplified patterns while speaking about historical processes and events, especially if they took place in another part of the world.
The unfortunate fact is that today no one can feel safe from the danger of forming a personal opinion based upon a mixture of truthful and incorrect information circulating around us.
In this regard, we could not fail to notice the editorial and some emotional references to the tragic, but heroic story of the liberation of Europe by the Soviet soldiers in 1945, that go against well-known historical facts (“Prague’s mayor shows the way,” March 13, page 8).
First, it should be noted that the Prague Strategic Offensive of the Soviet Army was the last major military operation of World War II in Europe, bringing an end to the continued years-long Nazi occupation of the city and the country as a whole. The offensive was supported by the Czech Resistance and resulted in more than 53,000 Soviet and Allied soldiers killed and wounded in just five days.
World War II itself holds a very special — even sacred — place in the minds of many of the world’s nations. This is especially true for Russians, as our country lost more than 26 millions of its citizens from 1941 to 1945 while defending the right to exist and then playing a decisive role in liberating the occupied states of Europe.
The verdict of who represented the force of good and who represented the force of evil during that period was enshrined in the fundamental documents of the universally recognized and highly respected international legal body — the Nuremberg Tribunal held by the Allies in 1946.
This year we celebrate the 75th Anniversary of the end of World War II, and we truly believe that no one can distort the historical truth about our fathers and grandfathers, just because they cannot stand up for themselves.
Indeed, our common history is a highly sensitive and complex matter to be addressed in a careful and respectful way, so one should be extremely cautious in trying to make an assessment of fateful events that took place relatively recently, forged of blood and tears.
We sincerely hope that every person or organization capable of influencing others will be strictly devoted to maintaining this priority and refrain from mixing today’s politics with sensitive historical facts, flatly applying black and white labels just for the goal of a transient dramatic effect.
It is the only way to fight “fake news” and mitigate its harmful effect on society and international relations, thus promoting attentive and respectful attitude towards each other.
Sergey Petrov
Representative Office in Taipei for the Moscow-Taipei Coordination Commission on Economic and Cultural Cooperation
Re-evaluating mask ban
Like all non-Taiwanese living in Taiwan, I feel incredibly blessed to be living a relatively normal life as all our assumptions about economics and security come crumbling down in the US and elsewhere.
Thank you, Taiwan! I love you madly.
Today, as I was strolling through my local hypermarket, I was shocked to see an entire rack of 3M N95 respirator masks, the shortage of which is causing doctors, nurses and other key people around the world to face a greatly heightened risk of COVID-19 infection.
I bought a few and thought it was strange that no other shoppers seemed interested in them. They cost too much, I was told (NT$139, about US$4.60 US).
Clearly, an N95 respirator is overkill for ordinary Taiwanese these days.
However, we still cannot buy and ship them to our friends and loved ones abroad. I appreciate all that Taiwan’s strict policies have accomplished so far, but these particular masks are needed far more in other countries right now. The total ban on shipping masks abroad should be immediately re-evaluated on humanitarian grounds. Taiwan itself should not become guilty of hoarding.
[Editor’s note: From April 9, people are to be allowed to mail up to 30 masks to family members abroad.]
Peter Dearman
New Taipei City
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