I would like to respond to an article in this paper on China's efforts to intimidate Taiwanese businesspeople ("PRC's pressure on Taiwanese businesses in vain: Chen," Dec. 14, page 3).
The world, especially Westerners, launched its fight against communism after the end of World War II. Since that time, we've seen the unification of Germany and the fall of the Soviet Union. The US sent troops to "liberate" Vietnam from communism, but failed.
The non-communist world failed to "conquer" the communist world. Today, much to the contrary, we are seeing trillions of dollars worth of investment from democratic countries -- and countries masquerading as democratic -- pouring into communist states in pursuit of economic growth, business opportunities and cheap labor.
But are these really good business investments or are they actually helping strengthen communist governments, with the result that communism will one day rule the world?
The US, UN and EU -- the so-called "free world" -- are good at imposing economic sanctions on countries that don't abide by their demands.
But when it comes to dealing with communist China, the same Western powers make compromises.
Even governments in East Asia compromise their anti-communist positions where economic opportunities are involved.
It is clear from reading the daily news from a variety of sources that communism is getting stronger each day -- and it is all thanks to the annual trillions of dollars in foreign investments funding communist governments!
Where is the fight against communism now? What of all the lives that were lost fighting communism? Has their sacrifice been compromised too?
Michael Teo
Singapore
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of