Newsletter No. 192

CUHK Newsletter No. 192 19th November 2001 3 Prof. Yuan Longping Ms. Eleanor Wong Mr. Hung Hon- cheung, George M r . Hung is active i n social service, devoting much o f his time and energy to promoting community welfare and education. He has served on the Boards of Directors of many schools, is a member of the Hospital Governing Committee o f A l i ce Ho M i l l Ling Nethersole Hospital, and has rendered similar services to the Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital Mr . Hung has made substantial contributions towards the development o f both the University and Chung Chi College. He is an active member of the alumni associations and has served on the Board of Trustees of Chung Chi College since 1973. In 1993, he was elected chairman o f the College's Board o f Trustees and a member of the University Council. Mr. Hung has given the University and Chung Chi College very generous gifts of his time and resources throughout the years, especially du r i ng Chung Ch i 's 50th anniversary celebrations this year. Ms. Eleanor Wong Ms. Eleanor Wong was one of Hong Kong's leading textiles and garment industrialists for over 30 years and is an active supporter of the arts, education, medicine, and charity. Carrying on the proud family business set up by her late father, Mr. Wong Toong Yuen, she took under her w i ng the knitting, dyeing, and finish and garment industries, and expanded them to new levels of prosperity and prominence. In so doing, she contributed to the development o f Hong Kong as a world-class textiles centre and the growth of the territory's economy. Ms. Wong has assumed leadership positions in many professional bodies and business associations. These include her role as chairlady of the Garment Advisory Committee o f the Hong Kong Trade Development Council, as a member of the Trade Development Council itself in 1977, and as general committee and council member o f the Hong K o ng General Chamber o f Commerce. She has continued to lend her unwavering support to the local textiles industry as the honorary chairman of the Textile Council of Hong Kong Limited. Ms. Wong is also actively involved in social service. She served on the University and Polytechnic Grants Committee from 1984 to 1987, and became a member of the Hong Kong Philharmonic Society and the Ladies' Committee of the Hong Kong Ballet in 1986, and a silver l i f e member o f the Society o f the Ac ademy f or Performing Arts in 1994. Ms. Wong has also been a major benefactor of the Friends of the Prince of Wales Hospital and the Community Chest of Hong Kong. She has served as vice-patron of the Community Chest since 1991. Her i ns t r umen t al con t r i bu t i ons t owa r ds the betterment of Hong Kong through business and social service culminated in her appointment as Justice of the Peace in 1984 and her being honoured as an Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire in 1986. Elsewhere abroad, Ms. Wong has left her mark as well. She has been a member of the President's Council of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York since 1993 and a significant supporter o f other international charitable causes. Ms. Eleanor Wong and the Wong family are longtime benefactors of the University. They have given their enthusiastic support to the continued advancement of this university. Recently they established an annual fellowship grant programme to encourage innovation and entrepreneurship on the Chinese University campus. Forum Re:RumoursofWar This is a forum for the free expression of opinions on specific topics — topics proposed by the CUHK Newsletter or by readers. Faculty and staff are welcome to suggest topics, contribute articles, or respond to views expressed herein. First of all, I ' d like to congratulate the CUHK Newsletter for starting a forum page. [Editor's note: the CUHK Newsletter does carry a forum article from time to time.] Let's hope that this can develop into a medium through which its contributors w i l l stimulate and inspire readers w i th their knowledge, insight, and wit. Secondly, assuming that you 'd like your readers to respond to some o f the articles, I am taking the liberty to do just that by reacting to your recent forum offering. The dedicatory piece in the 19th October issue, entitled 'Rumours of War', expresses sentiments that I feel are based on unfounded premises; and although I have no quarrel with the author's compassionate intentions, I would take issue with some of his premises. Wading through the prose, one quickly surmises that the writer doesn't agree wi th the current offensive against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Regrettably however, he gives no coherent or cogent explanation as to why he disagrees. Neither, for that matter, does he suggest an alternative. Instead, he takes the moral high ground from where to make his pronouncements, which, I must say, I found rather platitudinous. One of his suggestions is that, this is a war of vengeance, in which the west is acting as accuser, judge, and executioner. Furthermore, there is no valid proof linking bin Laden and his A1 Qaeda network to the atrocities in New York and Washington. A l l this, I find, flies in the face of reasonable assumption. Does it not matter to h im that 1. whatever the investigators have on these individuals seemed to have convinced not just the Americans and Europeans, but most non-westem governments as well; that 2. evidence emerging from earlier acts of terrorism (US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, the earlier Trade Center bombing, suicide attack on the Cole) has consistently implicated the A1 Qaeda group; and that 3. at least two of those already convicted in the earlier Trade Center attack have confessed their links to the same group? In other words, is he not convinced that, maybe, something that looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck is, in all probability, a duck? Furthermore, the author seems to have missed the point about why, alongside other steps, the west has also adopted a military strategy. He has ingenuously attributed this decision to a heartless craving by Americans for raw vengeance. Although I myself believe in non-violence for settling most human conflicts, I don't, on the other hand, rule out force when that seems to be the only means available for dealing with an intractable problem. Terrorism is one such problem; it seeks to influence governments and their policies by inflicting carnage on innocent civilians. It's a cancer in the body of the world community, and it needs to be cut out, wi th a sharp scalpel, namely, force. Such invasive operations always cause collateral discomfort; but it's all for the patient's own good. Therefore, I believe that the present course of action in Afghanistan has been a last resort, and the least bad that could have been undertaken. No one can deny that a more non-violent alternative had been tried before this, when the USA asked the Taliban to hand over the accused for trial. This, of course, could have been done in the same way the indicted in Bosnia have been brought before the international tribunal at the Hague, namely, by first instituting the tribunal under the auspices of the United Nations. However, given the very special situation in South Asia, it is unlikely a similar procedure would have worked. Nevertheless, just as the accused at the Hague, bin Laden and his followers too would have received a fair trial 一 yes, even in the United States! However, since these individuals refused to face their accusers in court, they seem to have by default admitted culpability, and have, thereby, invited their own destruction. Finally, a defence against our alleged collective guilt. The author ends with the suggestion that we, by our current response to the acts of terrorism, have ourselves become infected wi th the same vims of hatred, vengeance, and murder. One can infer from his sentiments that force is an absolute evil, even the kind that is initiated to oppose a greater evil. But surely this is mindless tolerance! Surely there are occasions when force is justified, even imperative. Even so famous an advocate of non-violence as Mahatma Gandhi recognized this. In other words, every type of response strategy has its place in life. The important thing is to be judicious and measured in its use. For example, opposing Hitler wi th military force was the right thing to do. So was opposing Saddam Hussain of Iraq, and intervening in Bosnia and Kosovo. I ' d like to close by quoting a few of Gandhi's thoughts on the subject of himsa, the Sanskrit term for violence: ‧ Where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. ‧ Human dignity demands the courage to defend oneself. ‧ I would risk violence a thousand times rather than risk the emasculation of the whole race. ‧ To k i ll these (rabid) dogs, in my opinion, amounts to himsa; but I believe it to be inevitable i f we are to escape much greater himsa. This last, in the current crisis, I find singularly apt! Pradip Na th English Language Teaching Unit