Over the past few months, I have observed a series of expressions of concern about the physical and mental health of former Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
As a former US diplomat and former chairman of the American Insititue in Taiwan, I am not taking sides in internal political debates nor taking a position on the politics of the situation.
Purely on humanitarian grounds, I am now convinced that the time has come to join those many voices, both in Taiwan and overseas, who call for Chen to be granted parole on medical grounds.
I have looked closely at the terms of his imprisonment and at his physical ailments, and conclude that a release on medical parole is warranted. Many city and county councils in Taiwan agree on this and have adopted resolutions calling for medical parole for the former president. Among these voices is Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), who has courageously spoken out in favor of medical parole.
In the international media, Chen’s case has also become more prominent: On Oct. 16, the London-based The Economist published an article on its Web site describing recent developments in the case titled “Terms of Imprisonment,” which concluded that the case of the former leader has “brought public scrutiny to his harsh treatment and even public sympathy for his plight.”
The article also made reference to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), saying that the case is “also undermining Mr Ma’s now dangerously low popularity, not to mention faith in this young democracy’s system of justice.”
After Chen was hospitalized on Sept. 12, it has become clear that he suffers not only from a whole series of physical ailments brought about by the conditions of his imprisonment, but is also showing signs of severe depression. Doctors have recommended sustained psychiatric treatment, which is not possible in prison, but the authorities have not given the green light for the medical parole that would make that possible.
Medical parole would also help heal the nation and get past the political divide that exists in Taiwan today. There is precedent for this in other democratic countries.
In the US, no matter what one’s political ideology or views on former US president Richard Nixon were, US citizens understood that then-US president Gerald Ford pardoned him to remove the haze of Watergate and get the country back on track. The overriding concern was what was best for the US to heal and get past a difficult, divisive time.
Similarly, no matter what his opinion of his predecessor may be, President Ma could engage his second and final term by taking humanitarian action — something all sides in Taiwan, and the international community, could agree on.
Nat Bellocchi was chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 through 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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