Hong Kong is a poor model
Beijing's "one country, two systems" scheme is quickly revealing its true colors ("Hong Kong reform talks `just show,'" Feb. 17, page 1).
To add credibility to its unification plan, Beijing promised in 1997 that it would leave Hong Kong's socioeconomic system and way of life unchanged for 50 years. Pundits praised Bei-jing for assuring Hong Kong's anxious residents.
Ironically Beijing now can make good on this "generous" offer and deprive Hong Kong of a chance to democratize (perhaps until 2047) because the territory, despite its many freedoms, was not a democracy in 1997. If Beijing feels insecure, Hong Kong cannot democratize. Thus, "one country, two systems" looks increasingly like "one country, one system" -- China's, not Hong Kong's.
Before the handover the international community erroneously focused on whether Chinese tanks would roll through Hong Kong's streets. The real threat turns out to be China's steady encroachment on Hong Kong's freedoms. This is hardly a model for Taiwan.
Vincent Wang
Richmond, Virginia
Going for the record
I was pleased to see you chose the "overwhelming support" for the human-chain rally as your lead story ("Human-chain rally gathering steam," Feb. 17, page 1). I wonder exactly what a scheduled participant is, but if more than 1 million people have already stated their intention to participate, then it is a good start.
The Guinness Book of Records states that the longest human chain ever was up to 2 million people long and stretched 595km across the three Baltic states of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia.
Maybe we have a chance. Maybe this is something people can get excited about. Wouldn't that make some blue-camp politicians grimace! And they would probably have to join in too.
Interestingly, and perhaps propitiously for Taiwan, the record-setting event was a big deal politically. At that time, in 1989, some nations had already escaped the grasp of Soviet rule, but the Baltic states hadn't. To quote the Central Europe Review, "this unprecedented protest action against Soviet rule brought the national liberation movements into the spotlight, setting an irreversible course for the three captive nations."
The event was held on the 50th anniversary of the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression treaty which led to the illegal invasion and occupation of those countries by the USSR. The rally was essentially a declaration of independence by the people, parallel to the Velvet Revolution or the fall of the Berlin Wall. It was followed by two turbulent years of ineffective repression by the USSR until the three states officially declared their independence and were quickly recognized both de jure and de facto by Iceland.
Interestingly, the US was among the very last countries to follow suit.
So now I wonder how many will actually turn out on Feb. 28. It doesn't matter if the record is broken or not. It will be another fine attempt to trump repression with mass-action nonviolence.
Who knows? Maybe it will turn out to be more important than either the election or the referendum. Maybe we can make a chain around the whole island next time. Or a giant happy face. That would surely make headlines around the world and redden Beijing's face.
Peter Dearman
Taipei
Soong is shameless
Your recent article ("Soong rails against `illegal' referendum and refuses to vote," Feb. 18, page 3) tells clearly that, after all these years, People First Party Chair-man James Soong (宋楚瑜) is still conspiring to deprive the Tai-wanese people of freedom of speech. Soong's mentality remains the same as when he headed the Government Information Office under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime in the martial-law era.
In those dark days, he was the one who did not observe the law and illegally suppressed people's viewpoints. Sadly, he is now shamelessly running for the office of vice president of a full-fledged democratic Taiwan.
He can't have his cake and eat it too.
Taitzer Wang
Cincinnati, Ohio
Stop gravel mining
I'm an American who has been in Taiwan for nearly 20 years, living in Taitung for 11 years of them. You should be aware that every day nearly 1,000 gravel trucks are carrying gravel out of Taitung. Every single riverbed from Tawu to Taitung is being systematically stripped.
The highway is falling into the ocean, the bridge stanchions are eroding away.
I don't know if gravel mining in the riverbeds and on the shore is legal, but it is sure to be a major environmental disaster in the very near future. The wetlands where the birds migrate are destroyed. The beaches near the river mouths are already washed away, rendering the coastline useless and eroding the bedrock below the recently completed four-lane coastal highway.
Ironically, at the same time, the national government is spending billions on developing the area for tourism.
This has already been going on for the past three months. It started shortly after the Taitung County Council decided not to accept the proposal for the nuclear waste repository. You should consider that the current gravel mining may be a reprisal for this, especially considering that the majority of the mining is being done in the Tawu area.
The current rate of mining deserves the immediate attention of the appropriate branches of government. And an environmental impact study should be conducted before the mining continues. The current condition is reckless, irresponsible and shows absolutely no respect for common decency, the environment or common sense. When the rainy season comes and the typhoon season comes, the damage done will surely be in the billions of NT dollars.
I'm told that the gravel industry and government officials who turn their backs on this kind of activity are `dangerous people' and that I should do nothing, say nothing, for my own safety. But I don't believe that. I have known only polite and courteous people here, in every branch of government. I'm sure that they simply don't realize what they are doing.
Malcolm Vargas
Taitung
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for