20031009

Don't shoot the messenger

On Tuesday, the Berlin-based watchdog group Transparency International (TI) released its annual "Corruption Perception Index." Seven out of 10 countries scored less than five on the 10-point index, with Finland ranked as the world's cleanest nation and Bangladesh the worst. Taiwan received 5.7 points -- a 0.1-point improvement from last year -- and was ranked 30th. That's one spot down from its 29th place last year, but this could be due to the fact that 133 countries were included in the index this year, up from 102 last year.

TI said this year's results showed unacceptably high levels of public-sector corruption in many rich countries. The organization concluded, however, that Taiwan ranks among medium-level corruption-free countries.

Minister of Justice Chen Ding-nan's crackdown on corruption and crime has apparently paid off -- despite the recent uproar over Minister of the Interior Yu Cheng-hsien being treated to massages and abalone banquets by business friends.

What is perplexing, however, is media reports quoting people from TI's headquarters in Berlin saying that Taiwan's democratization has also given rise to political corruption and citing government procurement programs and vote-buying as examples.

It is not known whether the quotes were used correctly, or whether they were taken out of context by reporters who were slanting their stories according to their own political beliefs. All told, such mistrust in democracy and nostalgia for an authoritarian era is very perplexing.

Illegalities in government procurement bids and elections have always existed. They are not a product of democratization. Government procurement programs under the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) decades-long rule were always pork barrels for civil servants and Chiang family sycophants. Officials handling the procurement and the bid winners shared the spoils. Corruption and back-room deals were everywhere and the legislature was unable to monitor the executive branch. After democratization, however, the colluding bidders are now legislators and councilors.

Election irregularities such as vote-buying are also nothing new. Before the lifting of martial law, elections were often little more than voters rubber-stamping the KMT's choices. Even if candidates nominated by the KMT were unpopular, they still managed to get elected thanks to vote-buying and bribery. After democratization, not even the ruling party's candidates enjoyed this privilege any longer. Candidates -- or their supporters -- are prosecuted once evidence is collected.

Democratic politics have now exposed many past cases of corruption. During election campaigns, the media reports cases of vote-buying and crackdowns by the Ministry of Justice on a daily basis. Frequently, corruption cases are exposed and political appointees resign -- perhaps giving many people the impression that Taiwan's society is mired in chaos, and that thieves are everywhere.

It is ironic that, by declaring war on "black gold," Chen may have created an impression that black gold reigns supreme in this country. As the justice ministry goes all out against black gold, the media reports on the crackdowns may create the impression that "black gold" politics have prevailed in Taiwan only since President Chen Shui-bian came to office. While the opposite is true, would calling a halt to the anti-black gold crackdown give people a feeling of peace and happiness? Only to those whose bouts of amnesia have left them longing for what they delusionally refer to as the "good old days" under martial law.

China says Hong Kong has regained stability

`BRIGHT FUTURE': Premier Wen Jiabao said the territory has stabilized since mass protests in July and that its economy is heading toward recovery

AFP AND AP , HONG KONG

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said yesterday he was pleased to see Hong Kong had gradually stabilized following a political crisis which arose from mass protests earlier this year.

Wen told Hong Kong media while attending the ASEAN meeting on Bali that he was also happy to see the territory's economy heading toward recovery.

"Hong Kong has a bright future as long as we are united," he said, adding he was "full of confidence" in the territory.

Wen also reiterated the central government's "firm belief" that the people of Hong Kong could rule the region better under the "one country, two systems" policy which has allowed it to retain high autonomy since its 1997 handover from British rule.

Tung, meanwhile, yesterday survived a motion calling for his resignation for not introducing democratic reforms -- the third no-confidence motion against his administration this year.

Pro-government legislators defeated the motion by 31 votes to 21 in the Legislative Council.

It said there had been "retrogression in human rights, the rule of law and economic development in Hong Kong" under Tung.

It also said the "democratization of the political system has remained stagnant" under Tung, prompting repeated public demands for him to step down.

Analysts had believed the motion had little chance of being passed, but it sparked strong debate for and against Tung in the lawmaking body's first meeting of the new legislative year.

It was moved by pro-democracy legislator Emily Lau, head of the Frontier alliance of pro-democratic legislators.

Lau said Tung had not adhered to wishes of the people for him to step down after he was forced to shelve indefinitely the security bill.

Before yesterday's vote several groups, including the Frontier alliance and radical April Fifth Movement, staged noisy protests outside the legislature calling for Tung to step down and demanding universal suffrage to elect the next chief executive.

Lien's wealth raises eyebrows

ILL-GOTTEN GAINS?: DPP lawmakers wonder how a family of civil servants earning a modest salary amassed a fortune and suspect foul play may have been involved

By Fiona Lu

STAFF REPORTER

A group of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers took aim yesterday at the wealth of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan's family, calling such extravagance a miracle.

They said Lien's father, former interior minister Lien Chen-tung, was a key figure in the family's wealth accumulation, helping it become rich by buying land during his tenure.

"The junior Lien bought his first land in downtown Taipei in 1959 on the eve of his departure for postgraduate study in the US. His father was the interior minister responsible for monitoring the island's agriculture under the former KMT government," said DPP Legislator Shieh Ming-yuan.

The farmland bought by Lien Chan was rezoned for construction 18 months later while he was abroad. The change helped his family make money on the property market, Shieh said.

Shieh said Lien's eldest daughter, Lien Huei-hsin, could be the nation's youngest farmland buyer as she bought land in 1969 at the age of two.

The Land Law in effect at the time casts doubt on the legality of the purchase. The law stated that only the person who was to cultivate the land would be eligible for making such deals, according to the lawmaker.

"The investigation and police authorities should probe the purchase and see if anything illegal or underground took place," he said.

Shieh made the remarks at a news conference held by DPP lawmakers to debate the wealth of Lien and his father.

The lawmakers questioned how the family became so rich given that Lien and his father were civil servants earning limited salaries.

A magazine has recently reported on how Lien became the richest politician in the country.

Tang advised Lien's running mate in next March's presidential election, People First Party Chairman James Soong, to stop dividing people based on rich-poor lines.

"Lien absolutely belongs to the rich group of people and Soong would fail to realize his goal of finding fault with the DPP government since he has included his running mate in the side that he plans to criticize," Tang said.

Tang advised Lien to lend a hand to the 500,000 students in the country who are having trouble paying their tuition fees.

"For the sake of his hope to win the 2004 election, Lien might demonstrate his kindness by aiding these students while he pays US$30,000 each semester for his youngest daughter to study in the US," Tang said.

But KMT Legislator Lee Chia-chin said he believes the public appreciates the Lien family for its contribution in creating Taiwan's economic miracle.

BELITTLING TERM: Switzerland has started referring to Taiwan as `Chinese Taipei' on its residence forms, sparking an outcry from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Switzerland began replacing "Taiwan" with "Chinese Taipei" in the nationality columns of residence permits issued to Republic of China citizens in August, a move believed to be done under pressure from China.

At least three cantons -- Bern, Geneva and Zurich -- began changing the nationality designation of Taiwanese when issuing or renewing their residence permits about two months ago.

The cantons made the move under the instruction of the federal government, officials said.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) launched new passports with "Taiwan" on the cover on Sept. 1, saying the measure would help distinguish Taiwan from the People's Republic of China (PRC).

Switzerland's policy change coming as Taiwan issued the new passports was not accidental, the state-run Central News Agency (CNA) reported yesterday based on an interview with a Swiss official.

"The move was taken under China's pressure," a Swiss official said in response to questions from the its Department of European Affairs.

Rex Wang, Taiwan's de facto ambassador to Switzerland, based in Bern, said yesterday he discussed the matter with a high-ranking Swiss official in charge of Asia-Pacific affairs two days ago.

Declining to name his contact, Wang said the official, contradicting the reply the ministry received, insisted China played no part in the decision to change the nationality designation on residence permits.

The official who talked to Wang said, "Switzerland is a sovereign country. The new policy about Taiwanese residence permits is an internal affair and has nothing to do with China. It has nothing to do with Taiwan's new version passports, either."

According to the official, the policy was designed to distinguish Taiwan from China. To achieve that purpose, the adoption of the term "Republic of China" was not a good choice.

"As Taiwan is not a country name, we have decided to use `Chinese Taipei' -- a name accepted on many international occasions -- on the residence permits," the official said.

The official was also quoted as saying the Swiss government did not realize why a small internal matter would cause such an uproar from Taiwan.

MOFA has expressed concerns about the policy and demanded Switzerland change the nationality designation.

"As the highest administrative officer of the nation, I'm now forced to wipe his [Soong's] ass after he had done so little to realize his empty promises."－Yu Shyi-kun, premier

Premier Yu Shyi-kun unleashed a tirade yesterday against People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong, the opposition camp's vice presidential candidate, accusing him of "dirty tricks" while serving as provincial governor.

"He [Soong] keeps slandering me and my Cabinet colleagues for poorly executing government policies and wasting taxpayers' money in exchange for grassroots support for next year's presidential poll. The fact is, however, he's the one who did all the dirty tricks, not me," Yu said.

Yu made the comments ahead of a board meeting of an association based in his hometown of Ilan County yesterday.

Despite doing a poor job managing the nation during his five-year term as the Taiwan provincial governor between 1993 and 1998, Yu said that Soong made the media believe he had done a lot for the people.

"We found out that the so-called achievements Soong claimed during his stint turned out to be nothing but a big lie and a dirty trick," Yu said.

"As the highest administrative officer in the nation, I'm now forced to wipe his ass after he had done so little to realize his empty promises," he said.

Citing the example of transportation projects in Ilan County, Yu said the expansion of the No. 9 provincial highway linking Toucheng and Suao was not completed in 1997 as promised.

"One of the reasonable explanations for the six-year delay I can think of is that the provincial government misappropriated funds to crowd out the government's plan," Yu said.

"A township in Ilan had requested funding of NT$5 million from the provincial government but was later granted NT$40 million," Yu said. "I'm not saying that the [provincial] government shouldn't grant local governments more than they asked for, but it shouldn't have wasted tax dollars like this," he said.

Yu encouraged the media to verify his accusation by checking the county's annual budget plan or with Minister of Justice Chen Ding-nan, who served as county commissioner from 1981 to 1989.

"One of the county's townships did indeed request NT$5 million in funding from the provincial government and later received NT$50 million -- NT$10 million more than the premier recollects," Chen said.

Yu said Soong had lied about the fund the provincial government gave to Ilan County during Yu's stint as county commissioner.

"Soong owes the public an explanation as to why he granted the county over NT$60 billion in subsidies during his five-year term, but the county received only NT$26.1 billion," Yu said.

"I don't care how he spent taxpayers' money during his term as the provincial governor, but it really bothered me that he lied about the subsidy granted to the county," he said.

Yu also dismissed speculation that his recent attacks against Soong were triggered by his interest in becoming President Chen Shui-bian's running mate in next March's presidential election.

"I've already made it clear that it's not part of my career plan to run for public office," Yu said.

DIPLOMACY: A report in the `Washington' Post did not reflect what Chen said to the paper, according to the president's spokesman

The Presidential Office took exception yesterday to the way the Washington Post interpreted remarks President Chen Shui-bian made in an interview with the paper regarding the nation's relations with the US.

"President Chen never said that he `would not bow to US pressure' as the two countries have mutual concerns on certain issues; Taiwan would also be concerned about the US tilting its stance toward China," Presidential Office spokesman James Huang said.

"Concern is not the same as pressure. Being concerned doesn't mean that you're going to get involved in another nation's domestic affairs. This is simply the press' excessive interpretation," Huang said.

The Washington Post, in a report published Tuesday, wrote that Chen said he "would not bow to US pressure to modify recent moves -- including holding a referendum on rewriting the constitution and adding the name Taiwan to its official Republic of China passports -- which Bush administration officials worry could heighten tensions with Beijing."

The paper quotes Chen as saying: "Taiwan is not a province of one country nor is it a state of another. Any kind of democratic reform is our own internal affairs. I don't think any democratic country can oppose our democratic ideas."

The Post said Chen's remarks were "unusual because Taiwanese leaders are rarely so dismissive of US concerns."

The report was written by the Washington Post's chief correspondent in Beijing, John Pomfret, who conducted the interview with Chen on Monday in Taipei.

Huang yesterday said that when Pomfret asked Chen whether the holding of referendums, rewriting the Constitution and adding Taiwan to the cover of passports were part of a strategy to anger Beijing and boost his chances of getting re-elected, the president replied that "such thinking was incorrect and meaningless."

"The president said these moves were based on improving the development of the nation's constitutional system and public convenience. The president emphasized that pushing these democratic reforms has nothing to do with the issues of independence or unification. So the things the US is concerned about won't happen," Huang said.

"The president considers the US to be a democratic nation. Our nation is also a democratic nation," Huang said. "So of course one democratic nation will respect decisions and choices made by the free, democratic will of people in another democracy."

Echoing the US State Department's response to Chen's comments, Huang said: "Taiwan shares common ground with the US regarding the issue of resuming cross-strait dialogue and promoting cross-strait stability."

However, he added, "Such a task is not something which can be unilaterally controlled by us."

Huang also reiterated that the government has smooth communication channels with the US regarding issues of mutual concern.

The presidential spokesman also rejected Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan's claim that the Chen administration was putting at risk US-Taiwan relations.

"The opposition party's inappropriate political interpretation that Chen's remarks will sabotage US-Taiwan relations is not true and may actually damage bilateral relations," Huang said.

`Despite all these enormous changes that have taken place both at home and abroad, maintaining the status quo still seems to be the stated preference for a majority in the polls.'

When talking about cross-strait relations, maintaining the status quo seems to be the key position for the US; it seems acceptable to China, and depending on their ideology or indecision, many in Taiwan favor it too. Deliberately or otherwise, maintaining the status quo to Taiwan amounts to kicking the can down the street for the next generation to deal with.

The number of new young voters who will have the opportunity to cast ballots in this next election in Taiwan is usually stated in the media as about 1.5 million. They are that next generation and one wonders how they feel about being handed this responsibility.

The US stand in encouraging the status quo may not be helpful in furthering the expansion of democracy around the world, an important national objective. But it does show the US electorate that the utmost is being done to keep their sons and daughters out of harm's way. Both of these factors are fundamental responsibilities of any leadership in a demo-cracy, and taking that stand is not an easy call. Making it more difficult are the US' regional security commitments, other important global national security interests and the type of government one must deal with in China.

But above these fundamental factors, there is the US commitment, embodied in the Taiwan Relations Act, to allow the sale of defensive arms to Taiwan and to maintain the capacity of the US to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security or the social or economic system, of Taiwan.

That is not an automatic commitment, but an important deterrent against force or other forms of coercion. It also makes especially sensitive for America the cause or nature of any action on either side of the Taiwan Strait that could lead to instability. Any change, therefore, from the US standpoint, must be peaceful -- that is America's status quo.

China does not react in the same way it did in the past to Taiwan or American behavior they deem unfriendly. There are a whole array of reasons observers can point to in explaining this. China has grown strong enough to join the world. It has become dependent on foreign investments and foreign trade. Its economy must continue to grow at the present rate or face social instability. Pressures for political reform keep growing. Growth has overtaken available domestic energy resources. It has, in other words, priorities that far surpass the cross-strait issue.

This is especially true as Tai-wan has already given China the base for its growing high-tech industry. Resources and expertise from Taiwan continue to be important to the Chinese, and they see Taiwan's economy increasingly dependent on China's. They also hope that a successor government in Taiwan will accept the "one China" principle, assuring that it will eventually become a part of China. That, from Beijing's standpoint, is what status quo means.

But equally important, what does status quo mean for Taiwan in policy terms, and what do the Taiwanese mean when asked in polls. Though there are several political parties participating in next year's presidential election, there are ideologically only two sides on this issue. One wants a strengthening of a separate sovereign entity that would negotiate its relationship with China on that basis; the other side would accept the "one China" principle and negotiate the terms for eventual unification. So in policy terms, Taiwan has two status quo options.

Which side is chosen is impor-tant not only for Taiwan's future, but will also influence what strategies China and the US might want to pursue as a consequence of the election's result.

China's present status quo strategy insists on absolute sovereignty over Taiwan and pursuit of "one country, two systems" under the "one China" principle. The US strategy for the present status quo is based on a Taiwan that is a separate but undetermined entity. In both cases, at least some of these strategies might have to change if the relationship between the two sides of the Strait changes. All of this depends on the outcome of next March's election and perhaps the outcome of the legislative elections in December next year.

But what do the voters who respond to pollsters mean by status quo? For many, how to respond depends on which side he or she stands in the election campaign. Status quo has been a popular response to polls for several years. In the 1990s, despite the vast changes brought on by democratization, in domestic affairs as well as cross-strait relations, the status quo, which broadly means no change, was the preferred response to polls. A lot has happened these last few years, and not just in government turnover.

China has changed drastically, in economic terms and in its need to be an active player in the international community. The repercussions of its economic growth and its military modernization had nothing to do with government change in Taiwan. The US' attention has had to change drastically in light of a new and vastly different type of security threat. That too had nothing to do with the government change in Taiwan. Despite all these enormous changes that have taken place both at home and abroad, maintaining the status quo still seems to be the stated preference for a majority in the polls.

Some of the better polls overcome this reluctance to make a choice by seeking where the respondent would stand on the issue of cross-strait relations in the future. In that case, two choices make up a large majority that want either to defer making a choice for the indefinite future, or defer making any decision.

The people are facing different circumstances in March. There will be only two choices available in the voting booth on the course Taiwan will take into the future. Neither will permit a cop-out, but each go in a different direction.

Already there is one group that is encouraging voters to invalidate their ballot to show displeasure, but this could also be another form of cop-out. That would be irresponsible under the country's present circumstances. Taiwan is facing the necessity of restructuring its economy and reforming a large part of its government to meet the challenges it must cope with now. At the same time, China is also trying to strangle Taiwan's participation in the international community, and it is rapidly building its military potential to coerce Taiwan.

The people's decision in the election will determine the direction the country will go to address these problems. That next generation that is voting for the first time will be participating in decid-ing what kind of status quo they will have in the years ahead.

Nat Bellocchi, former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan, is now a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.

When experts become ignorant, when representatives become self-centered and only represent themselves or their cronies, when politicians become detached from the public, when the media, instead of reporting, project only their own agenda -- this is the sad state of politics in Taiwan today (Drafting a Cons-titution would alter status quo, Oct. 3, page 8.)

All these problems are deeply rooted in Taiwan after half a century of the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) dictatorial, incestuous Chinese politics. One can call it incestuous because its closed nature does not allow it to learn from outside ideas to improve its way of thinking, just like a marriage of close relatives does not allow the outside gene pool to improve its stock. This eventually leads to all kinds of political monsters being born.

Creation of a new constitution deteriorating into a campaign trick? Are these words coming from an Academia Sinica researcher? What is more important than creating a constitution for democracy? Rule of law?

In a country such as Taiwan which, in the truest sense, has no constitution of its own? Does he really think the shortcomings in Taiwan's democracy cannot be addressed by any change?

Fortunately, President Chen Shui-bian does not think so. Judging by his brave push for a new constitution and reform, despite of all the obstructions and defamation by the KMT, the nation's democracy has a much brighter future than these experts are willing to admit. With a good leader and most countrymen willing to follow, as was evident at the name rectifying parade.

Altering the status quo? It depends on your interpretation of status quo. If it means changing political cultures and giving control back to the people, so be it. Isn't it what democracy is about? What does anyone, including the opposition, the US and China, have to complain about?

Doesn't Chinese propaganda always say that only a small fraction of Taiwanese demand independence? What if a major-ity voted for a name change? Can China still oppose it with a straight face?

Taiwan has become No. 1 in the world in some electronic products. Taiwanese ingenuity is quite amazing. This constitution thing -- I don't think there is any precedent. From where I am, I see another Taiwanese miracle brewing. Let's give it a fair chance. And try to lead or to follow, or get out of the way.