Smokers need help
While the new anti-tobacco law prohibiting smoking in public places is a welcome piece of legislation, it fails to address the needs of tobacco users. Many are unable to combat the addiction on their own. The penalties issued to smokers should include a required program to address addiction and help them quit.
I smoked for more than 30 years. I wanted to quit, but could not do it on my own. Then a psychologist hypnotized me and I never smoked again. That was over 30 years ago.
BILL PARKHURST
Forestville, California
Sharing the pain
The Council of Labor Affairs reports that 200,000 Taiwanese are on voluntary unpaid leave, but labor associations claim that the survey results underestimate actual figures by between 200,000 and 300,000. While I agree that voluntary unpaid leave may be effective in holding unemployment down, legislative measures should be passed to ensure that management and business owners also feel the pain of the economic downturn. I envision a law that requires companies that “request” employees to take voluntary leave to do two things.
First, they should be prohibited from giving bonuses to management during the time of voluntary leave. This would spread the pain to management, which is rarely — if ever — asked to take voluntary leave.
Second, companies should not be allowed to renew contracts with foreign laborers while Taiwanese employees are receiving lower salaries because of voluntary leave.
PAUL MALFARA
Kaohsiung
Taiwan does not equal ROC
Activist groups in the US are again pressing Congress to pass a resolution to “cancel” the “one China” policy and make other changes in the executive branch’s attitude toward Taiwan. The Taipei Times always gives such efforts front-page coverage, causing readers to think that the underlying rationale finds full support in the newspaper’s established editorial policy. In the interest of press freedom, I wonder if it would be possible to present a different point of view?
The “one China” policy of the US says that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is the sole legitimate government of China. That is all that it says. Why any Taiwanese activist groups make the “cancellation” of such a policy the centerpiece of their lobbying efforts in Washington is therefore baffling. Of course, if one maintains that this policy includes the premise that “Taiwan is part of China,” that would be something worth arguing about. However, the CRS Report for Congress of July 9, 2007, titled China/Taiwan: Evolution of the “One China” Policy, makes clear that the policy includes no such premise and the US government has never recognized PRC sovereignty over Taiwan.
The Rogers v. Sheng case (DC Circuit, 1960), made clear that the US government has never recognized Republic of China (ROC) sovereignty over Taiwan either. The ruling in that case is fully supported by the Taiwan Relations Act, which stopped recognizing the ROC terminology in dealing with Taiwanese affairs, as well as current US Department of State guidelines for the 21st century.
The “one China” policy does not impede Taiwan’s quest for international standing. But solutions to Taiwan’s current “identity problem” can only be effectively formulated when the green camp wakes up to the legal reality that “Taiwan does not equal the ROC.”
As State Department documents from the 1950s make abundantly clear, the ROC is a Chinese government-in-exile currently residing on Taiwanese soil.
In summary, it would make much more sense for US-based Taiwanese activist groups to support the “one China” policy and then to fully re-explain to members of Congress, research organizations, the media and so on what this policy actually involves.
ROGER C.S. LIN
Taipei
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
RSS