Ban should cover `dual use'
The EU's plan to develop a "code of conduct" before lifting the arms embargo imposed against China simply will not work ("Arms Ban on China to be Lifted," Jan. 14, page 1). Once the weapons are sold to China, how can EU nations interfere in its internal affairs -- and how will the Chinese military use it?
The US, which opposed the EU's move, should have learned a painful lesson from its own sales of "dual-use" technologies (which have civilian and military implications) to ostensibly civilian organizations and academic institutions in China: supercomputers and rocket and satellite technologies wound up in military-controlled front companies or field sites of military regions.
The EU should not delude itself and risk a major confrontation with the US. The EU can sell other products and services to China.
Vincent Wang
Richmond, Virgina
Exclusion is an outrage
The tragedies caused by the devastating tsunami that struck Southeast Asia have raised an all-out relief effort from around the globe. Taiwan -- itself a weathered victim of natural disasters -- and its people have once again shown their sincere philanthropy toward tsunami victims by emptying their pockets and gathering essential food and medical supplies for the affected countries.
Unfortunately, Taiwanese's relief supplies have been kept at bay, and Taiwan, even as one of the major contributors, has been denied representation in conferences coordinating relief efforts, simply because of the unjustified and inhumane pressure from one of the members of the UN. Such an act not only hurts the feeling of the people of Taiwan but also affects the very survival of the tsunami victims.
As dismaying as it is, this turn of events is not new to Taiwanese. Two years ago, when Taiwan was under the full-scale assault of the SARS virus originating in China, the very same country claiming to represent Taiwan did its best to keep the World Health Organization from delivering critical samples to Taiwan for establishing diagnostic protocols.
Such an evil deed was by no means less brutal than the gassing of the Kurdish by former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and deserves the harshest condemnation by the global community. However, the UN's inability to resolve international disputes and enforce resolutions continues to encourage the display of barbarian behaviors by rogue nations.
The UN and its affiliated organizations' negligence in acknowledging Taiwan as a sovereign political entity was once again shown in an article published in the September 2004 issue of National Geographic, authored by the director of the UN Secretariat for Disaster Reduction, Salvano Briceno.
In the article Briceno listed the seven deadliest quakes from the past 30 years, including 2002 Molise earthquake in Italy that killed 29 people and 1994 Northridge earthquake in California that claimed 58 victims. As unbelievable as it is, the list doesn't include the killer quake that rocked Taiwan on Sept. 21, 1999, claiming more than 2,400 lives, including those of my father-in-law and grandmother-in-law, and causing a direct property loss of around US$10 billion.
The failure of Briceno's staff in recognizing the level of damage caused by the quake, which seems to imply that Briceno and his staff have deemed the lives perished in Taiwan unworthy of mentioning and the lessons so traumatically experienced by Taiwanese irrelevant to the glorious goal of "Disaster Reduction" of his organization, is puzzling and extremely disheartening to the families of the 921 victims.
We may naively hope that the omission of the 921 earthquake information from the article was a result of unintentional ignorance on the part of the UN Secretariat rather than an act of deliberate negligence. Unfortunately, the reality indicates otherwise.
The failure of the UN and its affiliated organizations in recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign state and the continuing the exclusion of Taiwan's participation in nonpolitical activities such as tsunami relief, as if Taiwan does not exist on the surface of the globe, will not only encourage further aggressive behaviors by rogues but also hurt the people of Taiwan and prove a disservice to humanity in general.
After all, tsunamis and viruses are politically and ethnically blind.
Lin Sung-chyr
Taichung
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS