Dear Mr. Colin Powell,  
        Miss Condoleezza Rice,

“Hierarchy, paternalism, and consensus” are always the principle of Asia’s hypocrisy of Democracy.

Asian authoritarians have even disparaged their western critics as “neo-imperialists” who seek to impose their own cultural value on others. The word “human rights” is a nightmare of many Asia leaders.

Mature democracy with western-style must rule out paternalism.

On the other hand; Taiwan is mixed in danger of becoming the case that proves just the opposite.
Rightly or wrongly, many people here were irritated by opposition parties to blame Taiwan’s current economic and political problems.

The blind contrariness of the opposition parties, the rampant factionalism, and the apparent inability of politicians and parties have deviated democracy in “western value”.

In Taiwan, from the authoritarian stand point, 50 years of KMT rule should not be condemned, but rather praised as the source of the political stability that allowed Taiwan’s economic development.

Unfortunately, the real people’s power was mixed with so-called hierarchy paternalism and consensus of Asian culture. The essence of this argument is that Asians do not know how to handle the responsibility that comes with individual freedom and democracy.

In our view, that western-style freedom in an Asian nation is to create havoc and let slip the dogs of social.

Taiwan could be a mature democratic nation in Asia-Pacific region. But the habit of post “Asian value” in which A-bian’s victory became a start of economic problems and political instability.

Taiwan’s people need to give A-bian and the DPP a massive show of support, and send the KMT and all of the authoritarian rulers in Asia a clear message --- Taiwan’s miracle will not be scared into abandoning their hard-earned democratic freedom.

The U.S. central intelligence agency ranks North Korea as the world’s biggest exporter of ballistic missiles and defense analysts say Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, and Syria are among nations the have been on the receiving end unpredictable North Korea test-fired a three-stage missile in August 1998, part of which flew Japan, fueling speculation that it was preparing to launch soon another longer-range missile with the capacity to reach as far as Alaska and Hawaii.

As the North Korea spokesman said that “we decided not to launch long-range missiles while the missile negotiations are under way but we will not indefinitely this moratorium”.

In our view, say one thing and mean another would be found in deal with some countries.

U.S. secretary of state Colin Powell asked new Chinese ambassador Yang-Jiechi on Wednesday (Feb. 21, 2001) for an explanation about reports that enhanced Iraq’s an defense system. State department spokesman Richard Boucher said, “We’ve raised these specific reports with the Chinese, and we would expect a response,” he added.

Obviously, “if it provided to the case that a permanent member of the security council was actually violating the council’s own decisions which it helped draw up, that would be of very serious interest to a lot of countries, not just the United States,” Butter said.

“It would bring the security council into further disrepute. It would make countries wonder about just exactly what motivated China into behaving this way,” he said.

In our views, communist China could be believed by its “promise”?

In Taiwan, former President Lee’s statement, when he put forth his “special state-to-state” dictum in 1999, Beijing paid its violated attitude by way of lobbing missiles into the sea near Taiwan’s coast shortly before Taiwan’s first ever direct presidential elections.

We are reminded by “one China, with each side making its own interpretation” (一中各表) --- an agreement to disagree on sovereignty --- during the 1992 Koo-Wang talks.

Its meaning about “making in own interpretation”. So that Lee’s interpretation is to say the reality in Taiwan by expressing of “special state-to-state”.

On the other hand, if Beijing cannot let Taiwan to express its “sovereignty” over democratic system and free speech, who could believe Beijing’s “guarantee” in security of island?

The greater Chinese confederation is best based on a treaty of peace. The confederation should not require a tight organization and structural relationship.

Consensus or agreement reached through communication and negotiation at leadership meetings and ministerial meetings should serve as a frame works for the council.

However, Taiwan needs your support.

                                                        Yours Sincerely,