[Dhruba] Adhikary in India's thirst leaves neighbors gulping [Mar 26] raises several issues that merit debate, especially the ones pertaining to environment. I would add one more to his list, and that is the cost-effectiveness of the solution. What Mr Adhikary seems to miss, however, is the genuine problems faced by India as the lower riparian state and its advantage as an upper riparian state. With regard to Nepal, it is a fact that the annual monsoon floods create havoc in the Indian states of UP [Uttar Pradesh], Bihar and Assam. It is also a fact that a mainly mountainous country like Nepal with its own social, economic and topographic issues has a limited ability to utilize its water resources. As a practical matter, it makes sense for Nepal to use water to generate hydro-electricity and export the surplus to India. Putting power lines through mountains is at best difficult; building canals to channel water is simply impractical. That brings us to Bangladesh. (We can talk about Pakistan but let us leave that for some other time.) Bangladesh has similar problems to India regarding flooding. But just because it has problems, are you suggesting that India should do nothing? Instead of the usual name-calling that is indulged, it can offer some positive tradeoffs to some concerns it may have. Even countries such as Turkey and Syria have built dams on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, and that has surely affected water flows through Iraq. But we live in a world where water has always been diverted by man for benefit. Surely, the gardens of Babylon would not have existed without the elaborate aqueducts. I certainly am no fan of the Indian bureaucracies; however, the Maoism/monarchism of Nepal and military/mullah network of Bangladesh are even of lesser merit than the bad Indian babus.
Ashesh Parikh (Mar 26, '04)


[Re] India's thirst leaves neighbors gulping [Mar 26]. Dhruba Adhikary said in his article, "Indians find it easier to exert pressure on individual neighbors when the deal is on a one-on-one basis - be that with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal or Sri Lanka." Dhruba Adhikary did not list China as a neighbor to be [pressured] easily. I hope he did not forget that a major portion of the Brahmaputra River is inside China. I am sure if India is going to treat China reasonably, China will cooperate with India over the Brahmaputra River management. But it has to be on [an] equal basis.
Frank
Seattle, Washington (Mar 26, '04)


The article India's thirst leaves neighbors gulping [Mar 26] by Dhruba Adhikary raised some very important and interesting points. Hopefully this madcap scheme of linking rivers left and right will die on the table of the preliminary investigation team. I don't know why people refuse to learn from past mistakes. Massive dams and water diversions have never worked as well as initially claimed, and usually they end up causing a huge ecological mess that causes more problems than any positive contribution from the construction. ATol itself once carried a series of articles that described how China continues to face floods and water shortages (on top of dam-induced water-logging) despite the fact that it houses almost half the world's big dams [The Ruined Land, Aug '03 - links are on the China Page]. There is huge opposition to the river-linking proposal within India and it will hopefully remain an unrealistic dream. At the same time, Adhikary's style of writing seems to smack of unnecessary resentment, thus ruining an otherwise great article. His sweeping statements about bad, pushy, unilaterally acting, selfish Indians who ride roughshod over their poor, innocent, weak neighbors are unfortunately reflective of many people's wishful thinking. The root cause for such attitudes is that India with its sheer size causes fear, and thus resentment, among its smaller neighbors. In fact South Asia used to be, and often still is, referred to as the Indian sub-continent. Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Nepali restaurants in different parts of the world often have to advertise themselves as Indian restaurants. This, coupled with all the illogical boundaries that the British have left us with, means that most of India's neighbors suffer from a serious identity crisis. The only way for them to define themselves is to aggressively assert that they are not India, and to avoid anything to do with India - including cooperation on any kind of issue. A government that signs any kind of pact with India is instantly labeled an Indian stooge by the opposition. This is such a political hot potato that very few deals ever managed to get hammered out. Considering the huge problems that all countries in South Asia face, it is perfectly normal for politicians in surrounding countries to pass the buck by attributing all problems to the ugly Indians, and to get votes by whipping up sentiment with inflammatory speeches. However, such attitudes are not expected from serious journalists. Nice article otherwise.
Amit Sharma
Roorkee, India (Mar 26, '04)


The March 26 article by Ritt Goldstein, 'Al-Qaeda has got it wrong', actually has a couple things not quite right itself ... the author seems to confuse several different terrorist groups. From what he writes, it seems that Mr Goldstein actually means to be highlighting the recent analysis efforts of Gama'a al-Islamiyya, the Egyptian group - not Jemaah Islamiya, the East Asia al-Qaeda affiliate. Both Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) - sometimes called al-Jihad or Islamic Jihad - and Gama'a al-Islamiyya or Islamic Group trace their roots to the Muslim Brotherhood: both developed more or less simultaneously along parallel lines in the Egyptian prisons during the 1960s and 1970s and both were implicated in the 1981 assassination of president Anwar Sadat. The two groups formed a major alliance that remained mostly intact until 1987 when Gama'a al-Islamiyya first began calling for more dawa activity while EIJ leader Ayman al-Zawahiri insisted on pursuing the jihadi approach, taking it and his followers to Afghanistan. Ayman al-Zawahiri, now al-Qaeda's No 2, has been leader of EIJ since his years in prison after the 1981 Sadat assassination when he inherited the leadership role by his defiant, vocal confrontations with Egyptian authorities and Western journalists as well as his strong leadership qualities. He joined forces with Osama bin Laden in Peshawar and later Afghanistan in the 1980s, formally uniting in 1998. Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman ("the blind sheikh") was the leader of Gama'a al-Islamiyya and now is in jail for involvement with the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. It is Gama'a al-Islamiyya that later won notoriety for its 1997 attack on tourists at Luxor. After that, however, the ideology and tactics of the group changed for good and it entered into a formal ceasefire agreement with the Egyptian government in 1999. Not so EIJ, of course. For them and for Zawahiri, 1997 marked a year of ideological transformation as Zawahiri and bin Laden increasingly merged their strengths and their thinking, leading up to their 1998 official unification and declaration of the International Front for Jihad on Jews and Crusaders under bin Laden's leadership. The split between Gama'a al-Islamiyya and the EIJ was complete and irreversible from this point onward. Also, the Ottoman Empire signed an armistice to end World War I in 1918; in 1922, Kemal Ataturk officially abolished the Turkish Sultanate; and in 1924, he abolished the Caliphate. The Muslim Brotherhood was indeed formed by Hasan al-Banna in 1928. Finally, Jemaah Islamiya is an East Asian terror group based in Indonesia which has links to al-Qaeda, but nothing to do with the Egyptian groups, except as their paths probably have crossed in Afghanistan, the training camps and so forth. Despite these minor points, I found Mr Goldstein's article interesting, as I had not known of the existence of Gama'a al-Islamiyya's critical analysis of al-Qaeda before - that they produced such criticism is not surprising, however, as it confirms the by-now-profound ideological divisions among the Egyptian terrorist groups that developed from the Muslim Brotherhood. Thank you to Asia Times Online as well for a quality and informative site, which I visit often.
Clare M Lopez
Senior Intelligence Analyst
HawkEye Systems LLC
Alexandria, Virginia (Mar 26, '04)

Mr Goldstein certainly meant the Egyptian outfit - apparent confusion might result from the spelling adopted. - ATol


Congratulations on your excellent article The evangelical roots of US unilateralism [Mar 26]. US fundamentalism is very important in US affairs, both domestic and foreign, yet is little understood abroad, especially the role played by interpretations of biblical prophecies.
Lester Ness
Putian, Fujian, China (Mar 26, '04)


After reading Mac William Bishop's Taiwan opposition set for a shakeup [Mar 26], I must say I feel sorry for Mayor Ma Ying-jeou, in his handling of the crisis in front of the presidential palace. Instead of carrying out his duty as the chief executive officer of Taipei city to execute measures that will put a stop to the travesty which is being carried out by his party boss, Ma willingly dances along the pan-blue alliance choreographs which have shown anything but consistency and sound judgment, underwritten by a seditious agenda which aims at achieving one's political gains at all cost, even if it means to create chaos and a general economic meltdown and, worst of all, even if it means to risk the precious lives of the Taiwanese people in an eventual ethnic conflict. Ma, although an intelligent executive and a political figure with an impeccable record of integrity, is behaving muddle-headed and has lost his good judgment in dealing his conflict of interest in this election issue. One sympathizes with his position as a "sandwiched man". Yet one would expect him to make a wise choice with resolve to pledge loyalty first to his city and second to his party. This means that he would dispense measures that would quickly disperse the emotional crowds in front of the presidential palace and let the judicial branch handle the election controversy drummed up by his party boss. (Why lose faith in the competency of the current judicial structure and process which was designed by the KMT [Kuomintang] and within which Ma was once a prominent figure?) This being done, Ma will be able to demonstrate to the Taiwanese people and the world that he is no longer a political suckling and has weaned himself from the poisonous KMT paps, which in the past secreted tyranny and corruption, and at the moment is oozing out a most nauseous and acrid bile of seditious contention. Moreover, this gesture will further foster an unprecedented trust in Ma's integrity and ensure his political career to remain healthy even after the party boss is long gone with all his ridiculous and fickle tricks in taunting the elected president into doing something foolish and dragging the whole nation into the abyss of uncertainty. Consequently, his "election is sure" as the next president of Taiwan in the year 2008! Most assuredly, I will vote for him.
Chunhui Yang
Salt Lake City, Utah (Mar 26, '04)


Regarding Laurence Eyton's March 24 article on Recounts, fist fights, shredded democracy, he is beginning to sound more like a DPP [Democratic Progressive Party] spokesman. This is unfortunate, as he used to offer some interesting independent opinions. While it is natural that everyone is now looking at the ruckus concerning the Taiwan elections, we should not forget the long-term implications. We should encourage from this election the benefits that it can offer (though the current election is probably a negative demonstration): (a) Peaceful transfer of power (through the ballot box), (b) Due process of the law by an independent judiciary and (c) Participation of the people. In time, when future elections are held properly, this can demonstrate to the mainland Chinese that a vibrant democracy can be held without engendering chaos and social instability. After all, they have been indoctrinated that democracy is a Western ill - along with the historical damage caused by the Western (American, British, French, German, Portuguese and Russian) and Japanese imperialists. In addition, the republic experienced under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was rife with corruption and chaos. Seen through the above, one can understand the 1989 Tiananmen incident was unsupported by the masses who saw the protesters as troublemakers and criminals. In the same manner, they see Taiwan as a lost child forcibly taken away by the Japanese, and is now having his head filled with woolly-headed ideas to perpetuate the separation from the motherland. Further intervention by external parties (good-intentioned or otherwise) will only serve to strengthen the hardliners in the Chinese Communist Party and the People's Liberation Army. Perhaps that is why while the Taiwanese would naturally want to have more say about their future, they were not interested about the referendum, as this would have been a needless provocation. Therefore, whatever the results might be, there should be a peaceful recount to settle the issue. As Taiwan matures and evolves, this might encourage the people and the reformers to experiment further with representative democracy. Perhaps when both are more alike a peaceful reunification can be brought about (unless there are other powers-that-be that think otherwise).
Tan Hai San
Singapore (Mar 26, '04)


Pepe Escobar wrote (Shock and Awe, from Mesopotamia to Madrid, Mar 19) that "March 11, 2004, in Europe was a direct consequence of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, as much as September 11, 2001, in the United States was a direct consequence of US foreign policy in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East. The tragedy - as well as the jihad - will go on." Here he takes the age-old position of blaming the victims for their murder. That's like saying the Jews in Spain were burned at the stake because they didn't leave or fully convert to Christianity during the Inquisition, and not to blame those who killed them. To purposely target civilians for killing is inexcusable, period. Jealousy or religious hatred or political reasons are no excuse at all. Pepe would prefer the US first ask the terrorists what they want before deciding what policies to follow.
Ben Green
USA (Mar 26, '04)


As Carl Herschberger [letter, Mar 24] has labeled my former letter on terrorism as naive, let me see if I can add a little depth to his interpretation. At least 20 good examples come to mind, but one should be enough to clear up some of the naivete. Take the Israeli-Palestinian situation. The Palestinians are a displaced, oppressed and poor nation of people with little hope of liberation or justice toward their claims of land and cultural remnants. This situation exists primarily because of Israel and condoned by the US. Israel is a rich, powerful, state with a large contributing expatriate community as well as the resources and military might of the US at its beck and call. Both the Palestinians and the Israelis are terrorists. One is as much a terrorist as the other. The Israelis are much more effective in their terrorism because of their almost unlimited resources, but they have much less reason to be terrorists. The Palestinians are terrorists of a very basic order. They have achieved the sympathy of the civilized world because of their struggle against such overwhelming odds. Yes, Osama bin Laden is not a poor terrorist. He is a terrorist who sees the injustice in the above example. Although I think he is misguided, he struck at the US because of our bases in the Middle East as an ally of Israel as well as other religious considerations. The twin towers of New York were symbols of Jewish economic power and the Pentagon represents US military power. Now for the "elimination of injustice" part. The world, since September 11 [2001], has spent untold billions of dollars on security, declared war in two countries costing hundreds of billions more, made about 2 billion people in the world as mad as hell at the US, killed and or maimed about 50,000 people, and wound up multiplying the terrorist threat about tenfold. (Does it sound like we're winning yet?) All of this because we refuse to take care of the Palestinians as well as we have taken care of the Israelis. It would take only one-tenth of the money spent on this war on terror to build a small nation for the Palestinians, cut out all this aid to Israel or at least give as much aid to the Palestinians, and we would calm down those 2 billion angry folks. I realize that it may not be as simple as all of this, but in my mind it's a much better fundamental approach to this worldwide problem than to pick up a gun and shoot first and find out answers later.
Ken Moreau
New Orleans, Louisiana (Mar 26, '04)


Re Recounts, fist fights, shredded democracy, Mar 24. Laurence Eyton is just on another anti-KMT [Kuomintang] screed. The point is, in an election as close as Taiwan's was, there has to be a second, impartial examination of the results. In any case, many democracies have survived crooked elections and recounts. As someone living in America, I am very envious of the Taiwanese people right now. Although there is a crisis in the country, the way it is being handled shows a level of wisdom and class that is unknown in America. I was particularly impressed by the immediate involvement of Taiwan's High Court, the thoroughness of their election law as it pertains to recounts (a recount producing a different result, but without proof of fraud, would mandate new elections), and President Chen Shui-bian's quick decision to agree to a recount. It seems that, despite the street protests and parliamentary brawls, Taiwan is run by men with a modicum of wisdom and class. The same cannot be said of the situation in America. The 2000 recount was a hash of childish tantrum-throwing and legal chaos. In the end, the Supreme Court decided the case on a minor technicality just as the deadline to decide the election neared. Taiwan's people also have a healthy amount of skepticism, which is also sorely lacking in America. That they would immediately start hatching conspiracy theories after their president was shot shows that they cannot be terrorized into sheepish obedience (unlike Americans, whose first instinct in times of danger is to sing the national anthem), but will retain their critical thinking even in the most harrowing of times. I expect that no matter what the outcome, Taiwan's democracy will emerge intact (although the KMT might not) and, indeed, strengthened. As far as China is concerned, I believe that Taiwan's growing maturity as a democracy will guarantee it its independence in the long run, as this will draw the admiration of the world for what is one of the most vibrant democracies in Asia. And although the leadership in Beijing might cringe at the thought of street protests and court challenges to elections, I believe the Chinese people will not look unfavorably on the vast freedoms now enjoyed by their Taiwanese brethren.
G Travan
California  (Mar 25, '04)


[Re Failures of a 'war president', Mar 23.] National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said on ABC's Good Morning America: "Dick Clarke just does not know what he is talking about. He wasn't involved in most of the meetings of the administration" ... "Clarke was not in the loop on top discussions at the White House." Not having your top counter-terrorism expert and advisor in "the loop" would explain the September 11 attacks and the misfire against Iraq.
Todd Smyth
Virginia, USA (Mar 24, '04)

 
Lawrence Eyton typically offers up some great reportage. But parts of his story, Taiwan: Recounts, fights, shredded democracy [Mar 24], leave me a bit dubious. I agree with Mr Eyton that "Taiwan is suffering its greatest political crisis in 25 years", but I don't understand his claim that the "capital city was all but paralyzed by supporters of the losing side ..." I walked amongst the demonstrators out by the KMT [Kuomintang] party headquarters on Monday night. For the most part, things were moving just fine up and down the main thoroughfare. A large part of a connecting road was decorated with barbed wire, delineating an area for the ralliers to rally and for the supporters to support and to put up pup tents, purchase commemorative trinkets and scarf barbecued sausages. They were securely caged within it. There were hardly any police to be seen. The scene was loud but orderly. Even the fanatics were mostly polite. I was out and around in Taipei Tuesday evening on my motorcycle and crossed half of Taipei in the process and everything seemed to be moving along as usual. During the spring 2003 SARS [severe acute respiratory syndrome] hysteria, there were reports about Taipei being paralyzed as well, and yet ... it wasn't. I learned at the time from an insider at Taipei Times that management, however, was nearly paralyzed with fear. It was only taking news reports from its beat reporters by e-mail, fax, or over the phone. I mention this retreat into hysteria because I wonder if upper management's tendency to panic has infected Mr Eyton this time around. On the other hand, I do firmly agree with Mr Eyton as to the lack of democratic sensibilities displayed by the KMT organization. Most of the senior politicos are still only half-aware of the age they're living in. Most of the senior folks in the organization grew up, attended school, and made their way through their careers during the martial-law era. Their political heroes were despots, as were most of their schoolteachers, corporate leaders, and fathers. It's thus no surprise that someone like Lien Chan throws democratic spirit and principles overboard at the first sign of trouble. It's not that he disagrees with democracy; I doubt that he's ever had a working understanding of what it is. While vice president under democratically elected Lee Teng-hui, Lien Chan used to have the Ren-Ai Boulevard (a major eight-lane conduit in Taipei) closed off for part of the lunch hour of each working day so he could commute in a police-escorted limo to have lunch with Mommy. Lien Chan isn't a bad guy, he's just a living fossil. Expecting him to change would be like expecting a cat to get with the times and acquire empathy and group social skills. It would be easier to teach it to bark.
Biff Cappuccino
Taipei, Taiwan (Mar 24, '04)


Once again, the DPP [Democratic Progressive Party] did no wrong at all, and the opposition is making all these troubles, according to [Laurence] Eyton in his March 24 article Taiwan: Recounts, fights, shredded democracy.  Eyton indeed has made sure he and Asia Times from now on will be regarded as the mouthpiece of the DPP by this reader at the least and by many others if one cares to read more of your letters. Of all the excuses that Eyton could find for the DPP, he missed one very important thing: if there was indeed a staged assassination, one possibility must be allowed is that Chen [Shui-bian] was not actually shot at all. By logic, it would not have been staged if he actually got hurt, would it? Once he was in his own controlled environment, ie, the hospital not on the list of treating presidential emergencies and farther away from the one that actually was, who knows what could have happened in the operating room? No matter how many pictures of Chen getting operated on or his wounds or stitches can be shown to the public now, it will never disprove that he was not actually shot before he went to the hospital. It was just simply too easy to get some fake blood on him in the first place. How could anyone suffering from a "deep flesh wound", as Eyton puts it in his article, still hold his arms high in the air, smile, and give everyone two thumbs-up? Chen's track record already showed that he had pulled a stunt like this 18 years ago: he was supposedly poisoned and shown on TV with IV [intravenous] tubes in him, but he was perfectly fine the next day when he actually lost a local election. One so-called Canadian journalist believes that there is no shame for Chen to cheat now because what he endured in the past (see letter from Mike Towle, Mar 22). Apparently, Eyton and Asia Times fully agree with him in total disregard to what truth really means to a journalist or journalism as a profession.
Jay Liu
USA (Mar 24, '04)


It's instructive to observe the aftermath of the presidential election in Taiwan in respect of China and the domestic politics in Taiwan. Would anyone imagine that the people of Taiwan, who are enjoying the kind of freedom of protesting and demanding a recount of the votes, would accept any form of rule by China, where there's nothing even remotely resembling it? The "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong too does not come anywhere close. The big businesses are apparently unhappy with the outcome, as can be seen from the fall in the stock market. A big deal is being made of the invalid votes being more than 10 times the votes with which the [pan-]greens won the election. But what's the relevance? The rule of the game is, who gets more votes wins. The corporate media both in Taiwan and elsewhere, fed by big corporations doing business with China, have made no valid argument in trying to stuff doubts down the throat of the Taiwanese people. It's ironic that most of the 30,000 or so votes helping the greens come from the rural areas. This grassroots democracy in defiance of big-money politics is something voters from the US and elsewhere should emulate.
Paul Law
Berlin, Germany (Mar 24, '04)


Re Abdullah's mandate: Real change or rhetoric? (Mar 24). While the article gave a good balanced view of the political climate in Malaysia, I am surprised some of the facts in your article are wrong. I am baffled by your claim that the ruling coalition (BN) would win less than 65 percent of the popular vote. To quote from your article, "The BN's share of the popular vote was likely to reach 60 percent or more, though it was unlikely to reach as high as the 65 percent it achieved in 1995." I was bemused and couldn't believe my eyes how wrong your prediction is. In contrast, the fact is that by March 23, the BN had won an overwhelming majority of more than 75 percent. In fact, the BN has won in excess of 85 percent of votes in the parliament and the states combined. In any democratic country, to win more than 85 percent of the popular vote is more than significance.
Kok Piew Kan
Malaysia (Mar 24, '04)

Your quote refers to a prediction in an earlier article, which is clearly linked in the March 24 piece. As for the final results of the March 21 election, they were still being tallied and recounts were being done when the March 24 article was filed - the "facts" you provide in your letter had not yet been determined in detail. - ATol


In response to Ken Moreau's letter [Mar 23], where he writes: "The real problem is not the terrorism committed by the oppressed, it's terrorism committed by the rich and powerful." I think the families of the September 11 [2001] victims would disagree, as do I. And by the way, was Osama bin Laden ever oppressed? He seems to have enough money and wives to keep a normal man happy. I believe those whose families suffered beheadings and clitorectomies under the Taliban might tell you that their lives, though still mired in poverty, are better under the US-backed government than under the "oppressed" Taliban. As for "eliminate injustice and you eliminate terrorism", I find this incredibly naive and simplistic. Terrorist Palestinians demand the annihilation of all Israelis; and in the Bali massacre, one of Osama's complaints that led to the bombing was Australian support for East Timor independence from the brutal Indonesian rule. Are Israel's existence and East Timor independence injustices? And how, exactly, does one end injustice in this world? For example, how would Ken Moreau get the Chinese out of Tibet?
Carl Hershberger
Sacramento, California (Mar 24, '04)


Regarding Bullets wound Taiwan's body politic by Macabe Keliher [Mar 22]. Mr Keliher closes his "one real, three metaphorical" bullets rigamarole (there was a second real bullet actually; it struck Vice President Annette Lu) by quoting a student at Columbia University who declares that that the 2000 presidential election in the US was "illegitimate", contrasting it with the 2004 Taiwan presidential election. Actually, the two elections have much in common: both were astonishingly close. Certainly the US election was legitimate, despite Mr Keliher's apparent disgust with the result. All initial appearances suggest that the Taiwan result is legitimate as well. However, the similarity most relevant to the current situation in Taiwan is that in both elections the result was contested by the loser, each man thereby plunging his country into a political crisis. Making unfounded accusations of suspicious irregularities just as [former vice president] Al Gore and his Democratic operatives did in the immediate wake of his loss, Lien Chan is demonstrating to the Taiwanese, and to the world, that: (1) He was unqualified to lead Taiwan; and (2) That the Gore legacy is spreading around the globe. Gore's precedent establishes that, in a close election, when one has just legitimately lost, it is acceptable to place one's personal political ambitions and party's thirst for power ahead of the best interests of one's country. Like Gore, Lien will fail in his desperate attempt. Like America, Taiwan will survive the loser's ignominy - but not unscathed. Meanwhile, the champagne glasses are clinking in Beijing.
Fu Zhen
Washington, DC (Mar 23, '04)


It is no surprise that Lien Chan is acting like a sour grapes loser of Taiwan's presidential election [Bullets wound Taiwan's body politic, Mar 22]. Lien did not ask for a delay in the election after [President] Chen Shui-bian was shot and only began to use the shooting as a basis for complaint once he lost. If the shooting created an unfair situation for the election, then it also created an unfair situation for the referendum, but Lien is not complaining that the referendum did not pass. Nor has Lien taken moral responsibility for the probability that it was Kuomintang (KMT) gangsters who shot Mr Chen and Ms Lu, or for the failed KMT attempt to assassinate Mrs Chen years ago. Instead, Lien irrationally tries to convince the public that Chen had himself shot. Your author, Macabe Keliher, seems to have some insight into the illegitimacy of Mr Lien's complaints, as does the US government. At this point, Lien has whipped KMT supporters into an anti-democratic frenzy. Since the KMT has a despotic past, we can only expect them to behave in an anti-democratic manner when they do not get their way. This behavior is the same that we would expect to see from the other Chinese political party, called the Chinese Communist Party. After decades of using governmental favors to enrich themselves to the point of amassing a fortune of US$1 billion in ill-gotten gains, the Lien clan should be satisfied. But just like the Chinese Communist Party, both the KMT and the Lien clan ultimately care about nothing more than putting themselves into positions of power.
Daniel McCarthy
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA (Mar 23, '04)


First, let me say that your contributors, Pepe Escobar, Syed Saleem Shahzad, Jim Lobe and others too numerous to list, are providing the most intelligent and relevant facts of the news which interests me. Thank you all. Second, to all of your letter contributors who are critical of your reporting of the war on terror and its results, let me say this: most terrorism is the result of poverty and oppression, combined with a sense of futility. No amount of military intervention, war, assassination, sanctions, economic and/or political pressure, will cause it to go away. Terrorist acts by a rich superpower are all the more reprehensible because they are committed not as an act of desperation seeking justice or liberation, but [because of] greed and the lust for power and control. Whether some of these pro-war letter writers like it or not, the US sponsors terrorism. It has terrorist training camps and has for decades. The largest defense contractor in the US has a "Mercenaries for Hire" division, which will do (and does) any bidding of the government's, including murder and terrorists acts. [Spain's prime minister-elect Jose Luis Rodriguez] Zapatero has it correct. Eliminate injustice ... you eliminate terrorism. The real problem is not the terrorism committed by the oppressed, it's the terrorism committed by the rich and powerful.
Ken Moreau
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA (Mar 23, '04)


In a recent letter to the editor [below], I criticized Pepe Escobar's anti-American imbalance, and ATol responded that, being a Latin American, "his attitudes about US imperialism might just possibly have been influenced by the US-sponsored terrorists and death squads who kept 'America's back yard' in poverty, misery and mayhem for decades". This, of course, confirms he has a personal reason for being anti-American, and thus, in my eyes anyway, lacks the qualifications to write objective journalism. A similar concern, based on ATol's response to my letter, can be made about ATol in general. Was Escobar's article [Shock and Awe, from Mesopotamia to Madrid, Mar 19] about US imperialism? I thought it was about the Iraq war. The US has not gone to war to seize territory since the Spanish-American War over 100 years ago. And if we wanted to annex Iraqi territory, then why are we not doing so, and why are we trying so hard to get a democratic government started there? The usual ATol babble about this being a war to obtain Iraqi oil has not been borne out; gasoline prices in the US have climbed, not fallen, since Baghdad was liberated. The US has sided with some pretty unsavory characters in Latin American history, especially during the Cold War. However, Latin America has produced it's own fair share of "poverty, misery and mayhem" without the help of the US. It should also be noted that one piece of Latin America that the US obtained during the admittedly imperialistic Spanish-American War, Puerto Rico, can vote for independence from the US whenever it chooses to do so, yet it remains a US territory. Furthermore, not all Latin Americans possess Escobar's anti-American attitude - millions attempt to immigrate here yearly.
Carl Hershberger
Sacramento, California (Mar 23, '04)


I am in a state of flabber and gast at the mail you have been getting from the US - it is still hard for me to believe that my countrymen are so imbued with patriotism that now honest reporting sounds to them like treason. I think most of your reporting has always been the tops. Megan Sweet
USA (Mar 23, '04)


I sometimes wonder if "Laurence Eyton" is a pseudonym and you really are not an outside observer [Taiwan chaos: Chen wins poll, results disputed, Mar 22]. . You toe the DPP [Democratic Progressive Party] line pretty well. True, the KMT [Kuomintang] had a dirty past, but the pan-greens are starting to match the KMT in their ability for corruption. The DPP is as dirty as the KMT, if not dirtier. You seem to forget that it [was] Ah Bian [Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian] and [former president] Lee Teng-hui [who tried] to divide the country along ethnic lines. The pan-greens believe only the "Taiwanese" [who] can trace a 400-year lineage in Taiwan have the right to Taiwan. Forgot about all of us "mainlanders" who married "Taiwanese" and were born in Taiwan. If a civil war does start because of the elections, it won't be the fault of Lien [Chan]. Ah Bian and Lee have been wishing for a showdown for ages.
How-Lun Chen
USA (Mar 22, '04)


I guess you could call me an "observer" of Taiwan politics. I'm a Canadian journalism student who has an interest in the politics of the region, and has spent about six months in Taiwan and Hong Kong in the past couple years. I believe President Chen Shui-bian may have been shot for real, but I also don't doubt the possibility of an elaborate hoax, to get more votes. So far, I'm 50-50 on the whole situation. Either way, though, I wouldn't hold it against him. He's done his time in jail, at the hands of the KMT [Kuomintang], as a political dissident. His wife lost the ability to walk when she was run over by a truck three times, also at the hands of the KMT, who denied her justice. Some say he faked being poisoned years ago in a different election, and he faked the shooting now. But whether he did or didn't fake it, there are some things he's gone through which none of the KMT people have. Him staging an assassination attempt is his way of saying, "Should've left my wife alone, losers." Years of martial law and silencing the Taiwanese people has simply come back to bite them in the arse. Hopefully the election stands, and good riddance to the old KMT era. I love your work ... [Asia Times Online is] by far the best English publication regarding China that I've found so far. Keep it up.
Mike Towle (Mar 22, '04)


We are so angry that you published such a biased, despicable anti-Lien Chan article as [Taiwan chaos: Chen wins poll, results disputed, Mar 22]. We now really think the editors of Asia Times Online are a bunch of pro-Taiwan independence groups. Because they are all pro-Chen Shui-bian from many articles we read from Asia Times Online. That is unfair, despicable, disgusting! We as your readers ask you to immediately stop such bias in the Taiwan issue. We demand you immediately stop interfering with Taiwan affairs by disseminating such biased articles to influence world opinion. We really think you are not journalists at all. Instead it seems you are using Asia Times as your political tool to strike Lien Chan and against China. You appear to be one of the Chen Shui-bian's cabal.
Your readers (Mar 22, '04)

Sorry, we didn't catch your name(s) ... - ATol


[Re Powell pleased, India perplexed, Mar 20.] None of us Indians are perplexed or upset with [US Secretary of State Colin Powell]. It was very well on expected lines. Most of us Indians know that the relationship between Pakistan and the US is one of slave and master. We Indians are not interested in that kind of a relationship. In fact, I don't think any dignified national leader would like his country to be associated [with the] US in this kind of a relationship. But what we are worried [about] is that the peace process between India and Pakistan will become subordinate to Pak-US relations. That is also something that most Pakistanis should also be worried about.
Shivkumar
Bangalore, India (Mar 22, '04)


Selection of Pakistan by the US as a "major non-NATO ally" is, alas, yet one more example of the Bush administration's [back-handed] diplomacy [Powell pleased, India perplexed, Mar 20]. I can't believe that the professionals of the Bureau of South Asian Affairs could have signed off on this silly piece of theater. The declaration has provided anti-government ammunition to the extremist beards in Pakistan while vexing India at a most sensitive time in India-Pakistan relations. Pakistanis are perplexed and Indians bemused by the move. It serves no distinct purpose, because Pakistan is already receiving much in the way of military spare [part]s and equipment under other arrangements. [US Secretary of State Colin] Powell should have kept his mouth shut. And if he felt he had to announce what he did, he should have had the courtesy to inform New Delhi first. It is sad that the conventions of diplomacy no longer apply in Washington.
Brian Cloughley (Mar 22, '04)


Your al-Qaeda member, Syed Saleem Shahzad, needs to turn himself in [Afghan offensive: Grand plans meet rugged reality, Mar 20]. [Asia Times Online] should, also. If you are not a part of the terrorist organization - which it sure sounds like from the propaganda you blatantly spit out - then you need to clean up your act. Journalists, you are not. If you are Pakistanis, you must be traitors.
Dan Piecora (Mar 22, '04)


Please take more care editing articles submitted by your contributor Jim Lobe. His work is fraught with inaccuracies. Some of these inaccuracies are somewhat subtle, like his blanket characterization of editorial writers from various newspapers in the [United] States critical of the recent events in Spain as "neo-conservative". Some of his inaccuracies are laughably obvious and actually cause sympathetic embarrassment for his public display of ignorance, like the headline from his recent article Iraq rift belies deeper EU-US strain [Mar 20]. Webster's dictionary gives the following definition of the word "belie":
1. To show to be false; to convict of, or charge with, falsehood.
Their trembling hearts belie their boastful tongues. - Dryden
2. To give a false representation or account of.
Should I do so, I should belie my thoughts. - Shak
3. To tell lie about; to calumniate; to slander.
Thou dost belie him, Percy, thou dost belie him. - Shak
4. To mimic; to counterfeit. [Obs]
5. To fill with lies. [Obs]
The breath of slander doth belie all corners of the world. - Shak
The only definition of "belie" that can charitably be considered to be at least not diametrically opposed to Lobe's usage is that of No 4, an obscure and obsolete synonym for "mimic". I know that Lobe is a reliable anti-American contributor, which seems to be the paramount consideration for your news site, but his work stands out for its sloppiness and embarrasses your organization. Thank you for you attention.
Donald Green
Boston, Massachusetts (Mar 22, '04)

Your long effort to discredit Jim Lobe is based almost entirely on one word in a headline that was written by an editor, not by Jim Lobe. - ATol


[Jim] Lobe's sanctimonious analysis [Iraq rift belies deeper EU-US strain, Mar 20] , along with those of ... various other left-leaning publications, conveniently ignores the one point of view that matters most here - that of al-Qaeda's. While I agree that [Jose Maria] Aznar's attempts to link the Basque movement to what was increasingly obvious an al-Qaeda operation was reprehensible, can anyone seriously tell me that al-Qaeda isn't viewing this as a great victory, despite [Jose Luis Rodriguez] Zapatero's vows to crack down on terrorism? Do you think the despicable culprits who carried out this act of mass murder are now demoralized or dispirited because Zapatero and his socialist cronies have promised to bring them to justice? Somehow, I think not. In their distrust and dislike of Aznar, and by extension [US] President [George W] Bush, the Spanish people have sent the absolute worst message possible to al-Qaeda - that terrorism can and does work. The age-old adage "if you lie down with dogs, expect to get fleas" applies perfectly to the misguided, naive Spanish people who voted for Zapatero.
John Callinan
Midland Park, New Jersey (Mar 22, '04)

Why is al-Qaeda's the only point of view that matters? Not everyone is as obsessed with terrorism as some Americans. There were many other issues in the Spanish election, and while the Madrid bombings no doubt played a significant role in the results, is it not a bit sanctimonious to dismiss all socialist