No matter the outcome of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Ukrainians have undoubtedly written an epic chapter in their history.
Through satellite images and media reports, the world must admit that Russia’s indiscriminate bombing and shooting of innocent people are absolutely barbaric acts that constitute war crimes. Such behavior completely replaces morality and humanity with barbarity and slavishness.
What Russian President Vladimir Putin has done clearly crosses the line between human and beast.
As Putin shouted for Ukraine’s demilitarization, is the Russian military invasion not ironic? Has Russia “demilitarized” itself?
In Putin’s logic, Russia has the right to attack Ukraine at any time, within any part of its borders, in the name of a “special military operation.” Meanwhile, Ukraine in Moscow’s view is obligated to demilitarize itself and be bullied.
This is a modern version of the old expression: “To only allow the officials to set fires, but not allow the public to light lamps.”
Is Putin not setting fires while banning Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy from lighting lamps?
Whether Ukraine applies to join the EU or NATO is up to Ukraine alone. Whether to approve its applications is the sole right of the EU and NATO. Unless Ukraine is a puppet regime of Russia, which is not a member of the EU or NATO, how can the latter demand, on threat of force, that the former not join the EU or NATO?
Compared with Putin, who ignited the fuse of war just to make Ukraine submit to his whims, the Ukrainians stand in front of the barrels and block the advance of Russia’s tanks.
So who is a savage coward, and who is the symbol of courage and civilization? Well, the answer is self-evident.
More importantly, Putin’s invasion and continued attacks did not cause the Ukrainians to surrender in fear as he expected. On the contrary, it aroused a common hatred for the same enemy. Despite Putin’s threat that the democratic world must not intervene and must remain an outsider, his threat was in vain. It has triggered the democratic world’s unified outrage, as these countries are now standing up, one after another, to back Ukraine, proving that humanity, freedom and democracy will not die.
Some democratic countries are naturally just watching from the sidelines, declining to stand by Ukraine. Perhaps they have not yet realized that living together in the global village, the democratic and communist worlds are fundamentally different, with a 180-degree contrast between freedom and slavery, human rights and authoritarian rule.
At some point there is obviously no way to avoid conflict, collision or war. The only differences lie in the scale and nature of each war, including visible military conflicts and invisible trade, economic and financial wars.
Therefore, no democratic nation, not even those far from the battlefield, can afford to sit back and watch like an outsider as Russia destroys Ukraine. All democracies have an unshirkable responsibility and obligation to provide Ukraine with military, financial and material aid.
Today, Ukraine is not only fighting a war against Russian aggression, it is also fighting a skirmish against the evil communist world while building a beachhead for all democratic countries. The democratic world should absolutely express its appreciation and support to Ukraine.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired associate professor at National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
Despite calls to the contrary from their respective powerful neighbors, Taiwan and Somaliland continue to expand their relationship, endowing it with important new prospects. Fitting into this bigger picture is the historic Coast Guard Cooperation Agreement signed last month. The common goal is to move the already strong bilateral relationship toward operational cooperation, with significant and tangible mutual benefits to be observed. Essentially, the new agreement commits the parties to a course of conduct that is expressed in three fundamental activities: cooperation, intelligence sharing and technology transfer. This reflects the desire — shared by both nations — to achieve strategic results within
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
RSS