|
||||
|
|
LETTERS | AUGUST 10, 1998 VOL. 152 NO. 6 |
|---|---|---|
Letters ASIA'S NEW ORDER
China wanted Clinton's trip [JULY 13] to improve the image of
President Jiang in the eyes of the Chinese people and firm up
his grip on power. This goal has apparently been achieved. But
what did the U.S. gain? Not much. Now that the party is over,
can we face the fact that China is a communist country? Is
communism still a threat to the democratic world? To the Asian
countries, Taiwan in particular, the answer is yes. The U.S.,
the leader of the free world, should have second thoughts about
the way it treats communist China and democratic Taiwan.
The red-cheeked Clinton as a groom and Jiang as a rather short,
dumpy bride made for an amusing couple on your cover. But maybe
they should have been perched atop a cake shaped like the earth.
And perhaps we will see a new couple within the decade: Chinese
Premier Zhu Rongji as groom paired with an American (or
European?) bride.
Clinton's visit allowed 1.2 billion Chinese to see the No. 1
person of the country that makes Coca-Cola, Nike sportswear and
Boeing aircraft, all of which are quite familiar to Chinese
eyes. Clinton's open exchange of views with Chinese President
Jiang Zemin, Peking University students and callers in Shanghai
is unparalleled. The Chinese have now seen a democratically
elected leader talk with the people in a direct way. This may
make them think twice about why their own party leaders are
seldom seen in public, let alone speaking in an impromptu
fashion with them.
America has long used the ploy of playing Japan against China in
its game of Asian diplomacy. Bill Clinton has certainly been
dazzled by China as a market for U.S. products; he seems unable
to see that country's true colors. On behalf of Japan, I will
say this to Americans who want to interfere in our economic
affairs: "You have not been asked to be a backseat driver; mind
your own business. Remember, this country has a huge investment
in U.S. Treasury bonds."
We should be jubilant that Clinton was broadcast live on Chinese
TV and radio. He was able to state the case for human rights in
a historic forum, and his message will bear fruit over the next
10 years. China is far from perfect, but we should not look down
on its human-rights record without recalling the U.S.'s own
version of Tiananmen Square: Kent State, where the National
Guard shot at students protesting the Vietnam War.
Americans believe that everybody else wants to be like them, but
the idea that the Chinese want American-style democracy is not
only a false assumption but a dangerous one as well. The
suggestion is that Chinese society can be remolded in the
American image. China has existed for more than 3,000 years, and
the Chinese have their own ideas about where they want their
nation to go. There is a new belief in capitalist economics in
China, but to infer that the Chinese see U.S.-style democracy as
a panacea for their widespread poverty is, at the very least, an
illogical leap.
President Clinton reviewed communist troops in Tiananmen Square,
an action that told the world the deeds of the Chinese
government, including the murder of protesters in 1989, didn't
matter to the American people. And then he sold out 21 million
free people in Taiwan by adhering to the one-China policy that
does not support Taiwanese independence. Taiwan has now been set
up like a bowling pin, the way South Korea was in the 1950s. JAPAN'S POLITICAL STRUCTURE
The economic recovery and prog ress of Japan after World War II
were the result of self-sacrifice on the part of ordinary
citizens under the infamous "Iron Triangle" of politicians,
bureaucrats and business executives of big conglomerates [July
13]. We have to question why we Japanese, the ordinary people,
have been so cooperative and obedient. It is the belief that if
we sacrifice ourselves, then our employers or our country will
protect us forever. Japan is a highly centralized, tightly
controlled society of "managed harmony." It is not a question of
whether we are trying to put a Band-Aid on an economy that
"needs open-heart surgery," as you said, but rather whether we
the people will continue to keep the life-support machine
running on a brain-dead political structure. KINGDOM OF THE ANIMALS
I find it difficult to share your enthusiasm about aspects of
Disney's new animal park in Florida [July 13]. You examined the
pros and cons and concluded that "Disney has solved the dilemma
of the modern zoo." A modest, well-kept zoo in a small town
provides a better opportunity for observing animals than a big
one like Disney's Animal Kingdom.
Your report on the Animal Kingdom theme park read more like an
advertisement than a story. According to Disney, conservation is
not the theme of Animal Kingdom; entertainment is. Native Flo-
rida wildlife has been displaced by 1,000 imported exotic
animals, many of which spend their nights in small cages. Strip
away the bells and whistles, and Animal Kingdom is just a
glorified zoo, another institution that denies animals natural
behavior and dignity.
We just returned from three days at Animal Kingdom. We had heard
of animal deaths and were concerned. What we found was a group
of people dedicated to the preservation and protection of
animals. On one of our safaris, a duck ran in front of our tram.
The guide immediately stopped and enlisted everyone's help in
ensuring that the duck had safely crossed before we moved on. In
conversations with the folks at the Conservation Station, which
provides information on wildlife and rain forests, it became
very apparent to us how important these animals are to the
staff. Great job, Disney!
Disney chief executive Michael Eisner should find a way to bring
the "Magic of Disney" into the worlds of those who may never
make it to Orlando, Fla. Many inner-city children learn about
guns, drugs and violence well before Mickey gets to them. One of
my fondest childhood memories was that Mickey always remembered
to send me a birthday card and invite me to a Mickey Mouse Club
party that was "especially for me." I am sure Eisner can come up
with similar ideas. I hope it's not all about money. Disney's
"Imagineers" should go back to the drawing board! AMERICANS AND GUNS
Statistics on gun deaths in the U.S. [July 6] show that there
are more shootings in which the victim and shooter know each
other than shootings from an unknown assailant. Yet people
continue to think that keeping guns in their homes makes them
safer. That mentality scares me far more than the perceived
threat of crime ever will. It seems that no matter how many
innocents die, no matter how many assassinations tear us apart,
we're never going to learn.
Re carrying a gun: I would rather be tried by 12 jurors than
carried out by six pallbearers. Don't give me victims' rights;
give me self-defense rights.
Kids have had access to guns in America since the Mayflower, and
for hundreds of years that was not a problem. What has changed
to create the senseless, willful disregard of people and
property? Whether we have grown dependent on drugs or handouts,
individual responsibility is going the way of dinosaurs, and
it's taking America with it. REMEMBERING A PRINCESS
A memorial to Princess Diana is necessary for the many people
around the world who loved and respected her [July 13]. You
snidely referred to the memorial site at the Spencer family home
as "Dianaland"; just call it Althorp.
The legend of Diana is just beginning. The people of Britain are
very proud of their beautiful princess, who lit up the world
with her unique smile. THE TAILWIND STORY
The CNN and TIME story alleging that sarin nerve gas was used by
U.S. forces in a secret operation in Laos known as Tailwind and
your subsequent retraction of it [July 13] left a bitter taste.
If so much contradictory information was available after the
story was published, why weren't those facts discovered
beforehand? Why weren't proper investigative techniques used to
find the whole truth instead of attempting to embarrass the U.S.
military over Vietnam? It is this type of irresponsible
journalism that has widened the gulf between the U.S. military
and the press corps.
TIME's apology pointedly and unfortunately avoided accepting any
responsibility for the story that ran in its pages. That
article, we are told, was "written by the CNN journalists," not
by TIME's own correspondents. But did the CNN journalists sneak
into TIME's offices in the night and insert the article into the
magazine? Where were TIME's editors?
You and CNN blew your journalistic integrity with your Tailwind
report. Henry Luce would have cleaned house, including top
brass. Until that happens and you return to hard-news and
rock-solid journalistic ethics, how can you expect us to believe
what you publish?
There are still unanswered questions about Tailwind. How could
such reportage, quoting a number of eyewitnesses and sources, be
so totally reversed, supported by quotes from other "reliable"
eyewitnesses and sources? And in your apology, some sources deny
that anything in the CNN-TIME story was true. One person even
says, "We did not use lethal gas, and we did not kill any
defectors, men, women or children." So what was a contingent of
Special Forces soldiers doing on that secret mission in Laos?
Selling Girl Scout cookies? JUST HAND HIM A BUD
So there is a trademark struggle over whether Anheuser-Busch
can use Budweiser for its brand-name beer around the world [July
13]? Where I come from, Budweiser is not a brand name; it is an
acronym: Because U Deserve What Every Individual Should Enjoy
Regularly. What ever happened to good ol' American marketing?
|
||
time-webmaster@pathfinder.com |
||