Mon, Sep 20, 2010 page8

• [ LETTERS ]

  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Just blame the DPP

  In the story about President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) faulting the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for complaining about the Taipei International Flora Expo, your headline is conspicuous (“Ma faults DPP over Flora Expo,” Sept. 18, page 3). Alleged procurement scandals related to the flora expo are the responsibility of Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) member. Taipei resident wonder how Hau can use their tax money in such a way.

  “The DPP’s constant attacks on the expo will only result in a lose-lose situation that not only ruins the expo, but also shames the country,” Ma said.

  Ma’s criticism is unjustifiable and unacceptable. How can a president blame the opposition party for the scandals his own party has committed? Many people suspect that the recent raid on former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) office may be nothing but a subterfuge to distract the public from KMT mistakes.

  People in Taiwan and worldwide remember vividly that, a few years ago when Chen was charged for misuse of the national affairs secret fund, then-Taipei mayor Ma wanted “Chen to die in an ugly manner” and asked Chen to resign.

  Ma also let tens of ­thousands of red-shirt protesters crowd the streets of Taipei, causing traffic jams for days. Apparently, Ma did not think this would “shame the country” since it related to the DPP. The country would be shamed only if the KMT’s fame was at stake, according to Ma.

  Three close associates of Hau have resigned and the KMT wants to settle the expo procurement scandals with these resignations. Taiwan’s judiciary system is notorious. Most of the judges are not color blind: They penalize green and exempt blue. The biased judiciary system is the true shame of the country.

  Charles Hong

  Columbus, Ohio

  The missing links of history

  While Nathan Novak did a good job of addressing president Ma’s claim that the KMT defeated the Japanese in World War II, there was a glaring absence in his analysis (“KMT keen to distort history as well,” Sept. 16, page 8).

  He writes: “The war in the Pacific, though it had Chinese involvement, was won almost entirely by US forces.”

  This justifiably assigns the major role in Japan’s defeat to US forces, with Chinese troops also acknowledged as making a significant contribution. What he fails to mention anywhere in his piece is the part played by other Allied forces.

  For example, British and Indian troops were heavily involved in the successful campaign in Burma, and Australians and New Zealanders played a leading role in the fighting in New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. Even during the assault on Okinawa in the closing stages of the conflict, about a quarter of the naval air power was provided by a combined carrier group comprised of Australian, British, Canadian and New Zealand ships and personnel.

  The intervention of the Soviet Union in Manchuria in August 1945 is also worth mentioning, since some historians go as far as to say that this was more significant in bringing Japan to the negotiating table than the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

  Tony Phillips

  Taipei

  Bickering is essential

  Regarding Adrian Ineichen and Lin Chia-yin’s letter, I can appreciate the idealistic qualities of building bridges and opening up to new ideas (“Letter,” Sept. 15, page 8). However, the reality is that it is not quite so easy to put aside history unless one doesn’t mind increasing their odds of ­repeating past mistakes.

  Remember that the KMT is the Chinese Nationalist Party, not the Taiwanese Nationalist Party. This major distinction often puts it at odds with the interests of Taiwanese.

  For example, the recently proposed change to the education curriculum whereby Chinese history would receive greater emphasis than Taiwanese history is based on the logic that everyone in Taiwan descended from China. If one applied that faulty logic, then as an American I should have learned more about King George III than George Washington.

  The problem is not the DPP “hating” the KMT for publicity. It is because the KMT has not been adequately accountable in the past for its human rights violations during the Martial Law era and Ma’s current Beijing-centric actions have left many wondering if he is the president of Taiwan or the governor of a Chinese province. Being treated as second-class citizens on your own turf is a continuing problem.

  While it may be uncomfortable to see fist fights break out in the legislature, the past and present actions of the KMT are why there is tension between the KMT and the pro-­independence DPP.

  Carl Chiang

  Richmond, California
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Trump noncommittal on defense of Taiwan

  • 2

    China a ‘troublemaker,’ Taiwan says

  • 3

    Trump’s picks a rude awakening for China

  • 4

    US confident of defeating China: US commander

  • 5

    Rutte’s China ‘bully’ warning hailed