I am writing in response to recent adverse comment on Taipei Zoo.
From my own knowledge this criticism is justified. And, although there are some mitigating factors, the situation is an appalling indictment of the zoo's management.
For a modern, well-funded zoo to keep an animal, namely a chimpanzee (`Siao Chiang'), in cramped, solitary confinement for nine years simply because he was intelligent enough to manage to escape on two occasions and also misbehaved, is inexcusable.
Although the zoo has used a lack of funds as justification, there has been sufficient funding available to construct an enormously expensive Panda House and adjoining buildings (which are now a white elephant as these animals are not coming to Taiwan), and a sea of concrete and garish buildings which, however appealing they are to visitors, appear to have been constructed at the expense of the animals.
There were funds enough to buy false trees to replace the natural ones cut down. I could go on ad infinitum, however, I will just say that the current orangutans on exhibit, which are totally arboreal in nature, are housed in an enclosure more suitable for the African rock hyrax.
However, there are two sides to every coin. In respect of the pandas, where politics raises its ugly head, the chimps I saw shivering in the recent winter cold are, despite having a DNA and molecular structure similar to humans, not the economic draw pandas are and all zoos are subject to the exhibit value of their animals.
Also, the zoo authorities are not masters of their own fate -- they are controlled by the Taipei City Council, which appears to be reluctant to loosen its purse strings, at least where the animals' welfare is concerned. On a recent visit to the zoo, together with an associate, the zoo staff promised to carry out he improvements we suggested, and credit must be given to them because they are trying their best although their hands are tied, at least for now, where budgetary matters are concerned.
As a longtime resident of Taiwan, I am most concerned with the nation's image abroad, and I feel the Taiwan's interests would be better served by a committee to oversee all aspects of the zoo.
Local academics in relevant fields and representatives of international wildlife agencies could act as observers and advisors, without political interference.
The criterion governing every decision should be a balanced concern for both visitors to the zoo and its animal inhabitants. A member of this committee could act as a zoo press officer to ensure that Taipei Zoo gets fair media coverage both locally and overseas.
The zoo is an enormous success financially, with a huge budget, millions of visitors and all the necessary expertise. It should, and can, be able to avoid criticism.
Charles Shuttleworth
Representative in Taiwan, International Primate
Protection League
Taipei County
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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS