Missile could strike at the heart of China

HITTING BACK: A defense report presented to the legislature calls for the development of a missile capable of hitting military bases deep inside China

By Brian Hsu

STAFF REPORTER

The military plans to build a missile capable of striking deep inside China, according to a Ministry of National Defense report presented to the legislature yesterday.

The long-distance strike capability is aimed at disabling military hardware in China that could be used in an attack on Taiwan, the ministry says in its 2004 to 2008 arms-buildup report.

The report does not specify what kinds of weapons are needed for long-distance strike capabilities, but it is obvious that they refer to ballistic missiles and cruise missiles now under development.

The Chung Shan Institute of Science and Technology has been secretly developing several different kinds of ballistic missiles and cruise missiles for some years, defense sources said. Some of these missiles were said to have been produced in small quantities and have been in service for several years.

The Hsiung Feng-IIE cruise missile, which was developed on the basis of the Hsiung Feng-II anti-ship missile, has already passed the 1,000km mark in flight tests, sources said.

The missile, should it become operational, would pose a threat to virtually all of China's vital military assets along its southeast coast and some further inland.

The institute has also made progress in the development of ballistic missiles, which are based the Tien Kung-II air-defense missile. One of these ballistic missiles under development was said to have a range of 300km.

The military plans to set up an independent missile command to coordinate and integrate its various kinds of missiles, the ministry report says.

As well as the acquisition of long-distance strike capabilities, the military is focusing on improving electronic warfare and information warfare over the next five years, the report says.

To ensure electronic superiority over the enemy, the military plans to develop, or buy from abroad, mobile electronic-warfare systems and weapons capable of countering electro-magnetic pulse attacks.

To finance such weapons development, the ministry has submitted a budget request of NT$605.2 billion to the Executive Yuan, but has been granted only NT$334.5 billion, the report says.

The ministry hopes to persuade the Cabinet to grant it additional funds for the next five years.

The extra money will be used to buy priority items such as eight non-nuclear submarines, which the navy is eager to acquire to counter the threat from China.

The military also plans to develop unmanned aerial vehicles as well as improve superconductor research and nanotechnology over the next five years.

Experts to consult on plebiscites

CONSULTATION: Speakers from overseas will attend a symposium in Taipei this weekend to discuss the practical implications of referendums

BY MELODY CHEN

STAFF REPORTER

The world's leading referendum experts will gather in Taipei this weekend to participate in a symposium hosted by the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy.

Dane Waters, president of the US Initiative & Referendum Institute, and Bruno Kaufmann, president of IRI Europe, have been invited to speak at the conference entitled "International Symposium on Initiatives, Referendums and Direct Democracy."

Other distinguished speakers include Andreas Gross, a member of the Swiss Parliament, Theo Schiller, president of the More Democracy Institute, and Adrian Schmid, former chairman of Switzerland's Green Party.

One of the conference's primary purposes is to allow people in Taiwan to learn from international experience with direct democracy realized through initiatives and referendums.

The foundation hopes that the conference will give politicians, intellectuals and the media in Taiwan the opportunity to improve their understanding of how a system of initiatives and referendums work.

"The experts can offer opinions on how referendums can be applied to policy-making and other serious issues that concern the Constitution. They can also talk about how to overcome the conflicts that could be triggered by a referendum," said Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Michael Kau, who is also president of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy.

Since President Chen Shui-bian suggested the country conduct a nationwide consultative referendum to enter the WHO after Taiwan failed in its seventh bid to join the UN body in May, a number of local-level consultative referendums have been held on various issues.

Referendums are controversial in Taiwan, because they could be used to influence or determine sensitive issues regarding the country's status.

The international experts are to visit the Cabinet and the legislature to exchange opinions on Monday.

One of the foundation's projects is to invite former US president Bill Clinton to visit Taiwan in the middle of November. The foundation hopes that Clinton will deliver a public speech during his visit.

Kau declined to reveal how much the foundation would pay for Clinton's visit.

President to stress reform

SEEKING SUPPORT: Chen will further press the case for a new constitution and praise the progress Taiwan has made in his speech today during celebrations for `Double Ten' day

By Lin Chieh-Yu

STAFF REPORTER

In his National Day speech today, President Chen Shui-bian will again ask for the public to support his plans for Constitutional change. He will say that if Taiwan wants to become a normal, mature and great nation, it needs a new constitution ratified through a referendum.

"If constitutional reform is to succeed, it is necessary to harness popular will, political consensus among parties and the involvement of constitutional scholars. We will not make the past mistake of having a single party push through unilateral constitutional change," the president will say. "The final draft of this constitution should be passed through a referendum involving all Taiwan's citizens."

In his speech, which he will deliver in front of the Presidential Office this morning, the president will point out the enormous progress Taiwan has made over the past three years since the first transfer of power to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). He also appeals to all Taiwanese to continue supporting the principles of democracy and reform and to believe in the determination of the party.

Chen intends to stress that the change of power from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to the DPP has pushed forward structural change in the country, with democracy setting down deeper roots, especially in areas of the military, protection of rights for the handicapped and the battle against political corruption.

"There has been great progress in the investigation and prosecution of `black gold' politics, which is so much hated by the public," Chen said.

As for the country's economic development, Chen said that over the past year the stock market and the real-estate market have seen stable growth and the consumer market has revitalized, a clear indication of the country's good economic prospects for the future.

"In August this year, foreign investment reached a new high of US$350 million. Many international investment and competitiveness-accrediting organizations have affirmed the results of Taiwan's efforts and see strong potential for the future," Chen said.

"We have also attracted many foreign companies to Taiwan to establish R&D centers and operational headquarters, and at the end of October the Taiwan Business Alliance Conference looks set to bring in NT$138 billion, a substantial indication of the faith that foreign investors have in Taiwan's investment environment and its competitiveness," Chen said.

The president emphasized that the "economics and reform" platform that he started to promote at the beginning of the year has already achieved its first goal, and now there remains the goal of reforming the constitution.

"People inside and outside the government have repeatedly emphasized that the current constitutional structure and the political organization can no longer meet the needs of contemporary Taiwan," Chen says.

"Serving as the 10th president of the Republic of China, I have the historical responsibilities and obligation of facing the serious Constitutional reform issue," Chen said, "and I should unite all 23 million people of the country to push for the new constitution to let Taiwan become a normal, complete and great democratic country."

The president said that even though the path to reform may at times encounter the ubiquitous forces of the ancien regime, which stops at nothing to constrain and hit back, the ruling party has already experienced it, adjusted itself and stood firm.

"We have faith in the 23 million people because we believe in democracy and reforms, so we believe in Taiwan," Chen says. "One person's power cannot necessarily change destiny, if the united power of all the people can certainly rewrite history."

China snuggles up to South-Asian neighbors

STRIKING STYLE: Prime Minister Wen Jiabao charmed and reassured his colleagues at the ASEAN summit with a dazzling display of affability and economic agreeability

NY TIMES NEWS SERVICE , NUSA DUA, INDONESIA

"I have never seen a time when Southeast Asia is in so much transition and open to ideas, and never seen a time when the US is so distracted from the region. In contrast, China is focused on the region like a laser beam."－Ernest Bower, president of the US-ASEAN business council

In his first major outing with his Asian colleagues, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China this week unfurled what has clearly become a basic tenet of Beijing's foreign policy: friendly, even superfriendly, relations with the neighbors.

That Wen's presence drove much of what was accomplished at this year's ASEAN summit meeting, is without doubt. What was striking was the style and manner in which he brought it about.

Again and again, Wen sought to reassure his colleagues that China's fast growth and expanding trade meant only the best for the region. He signed a menu of agreements, proposed a variety of people-to-people exchanges and offered a special expo in China next year for Southeast Asian businesses.

From China's point of view the display of affability was intended not only for the regional audience but for the wider listening gallery, particularly the one in Washington.

"He wants to show the West: `See we're trusted in our own neighborhood,'" an Asian diplomat said at a signing ceremony on Wednesday, which featured China and the 10 ASEAN countries.

Chinese President Hu Jintao is to meet with US President George W. Bush in 10 days at the APEC summit conference in Bangkok and Wen is scheduled to make his first visit to Washington in early December.

The Chinese prime minister exercised what was commonly referred to here in Bali as his "charm offensive." He had the field to himself.

Though the US has been the dominant power in the region since World War II, it is not a member of the ASEAN regional group and unlike Japan, South Korea, India and China, is not a participant in the discussions.

There were only a handful of American business people at a business summit that accompanied the meeting of the leaders, and there were no American diplomats observing the proceedings.

After Japan, the US remains the biggest investor in Southeast Asia but in the past several years American investment has declined. Further, Washington is perceived as being consumed by its agenda revolving around the campaign against terror and problems in the Middle East.

"I have never seen a time when Southeast Asia is in so much transition and open to ideas, and never seen a time when the US is so distracted from the region," said Ernest Bower, the president of the US-ASEAN business council that represents big American corporations in the region.

In contrast, he said, "China is focused on the region like a laser beam."

Wen's "charm offensive" in Bali is part of what some Asian diplomats are calling China's decision to take a "strategic pause" abroad while it focuses on rapid domestic growth and modernization.

To achieve that growth with the minimum of disruption, the Chinese leadership is intent, these diplomats say, on securing smooth relations with the rest of the world, including its own back yard.

Last year China dropped its militant stand on a dispute over islands in the South China Sea. Instead, it was opting, "for the time being," said the Chinese ambassador to Indonesia, Lu Shumin, for a "cooperative" solution.

Many nations in the region are rich in the natural resources that China needs to fuel its economic growth.

It is no accident that the Chinese leader, Hu, is addressing the Australian parliament in Canberra on Oct. 24, the day after Bush, who will end his upcoming Asian trip in the Australian capital. Australia recently won a sizable contract to sell liquid natural gas to China and Australia sells China large quantities of iron ore and alumina.

Similarly, China is forging close diplomatic and political links with Indonesia which has deep reserves of oil as well as liquid natural gas. Until a few years ago, China and its government was considered an almost hostile power in Indonesia, and China was upset by what it considered the Indonesian government's discriminatory policies toward the ethnic Chinese population.

But now Lu is accorded first-rank status by the Indonesians. As a mark of China's burgeoning economic and political influence in Indonesia, Lu was Citibank's guest of honor this year at a retreat in Indonesia of some of the company's senior executives.

For some, Wen's performance in Bali was just one more illustration of China's regional comeback. Centuries ago, Chinese settled along the northern coast of Java, now the main island of Indonesia, as part of China's great epoch of Asian trade.

No one expects the Chinese comeback in quite those terms.

But Bower said: "I do feel the Chinese Monroe Doctrine is being built here in the region. As the Chinese get their act together and play on the world stage, this region is the first of a series of concentric circles."

Premier under fire over HK remarks

AP , HONG KONG

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's call for "gradual" democracy in Hong Kong drew fire yesterday from opposition politicians, who say it's high time for full democracy now. But others said Wen's remark might be a cautious step forward.

Wen said on Wednesday that Hong Kong should take "a gradual approach to democracy" to protect rights and freedoms guaranteed by its mini-constitution, the Basic Law, which took effect when Britain handed this former colony back to China in 1997.

Many here say Hong Kong's move toward democracy has been too slow, with no timetable for letting the territory's voters pick their own leader.

Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa was selected by an elite committee loyal to Beijing, while ordinary citizens voted for 24 of their 60 legislators.

"What we need is now is full democracy," said lawmaker Albert Ho of the opposition Democratic Party, adding that Wen's remarks "are more suitable for mainland Chinese society."

Under a special deal with Beijing, Hong Kong enjoys Western-style speech and assembly rights not granted in China.

Despite opposition skepticism, some were upbeat about Wen's statement.

"That's a careful and positive comment," said Ma Ngok, a political scientist at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.

Prominent rights activist Law Yuk-kai said Wen's remark appeared to mark the first time a Beijing official acknowledged that democracy was needed to protect freedoms and human rights.

"It's an important shift that the Beijing officials are now talking about democracy, not just about economic development for Hong Kong," said Law, who is director of the Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor -- a group that often sharply criticizes the government.

"It does signal to the Hong Kong leader that he should be more open to democratic development," Law said.

Demands for political reform have stepped up since July 1, when a rally by 500,000 people prompted a political upheaval that derailed an anti-subversion bill, which critics feared would harm Hong Kong's freedoms. Many were also expressing anger at what they perceive as bad governance by Tung.

Wen's remark was made to reporters on Bali, where he was meeting with other Asian leaders at a regional conference.

Don't believe everything you read

An interview of President Chen Shui-bian, which appeared on the Washington Post on Tuesday, has created a controversy, even prompting a response from US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher. Upon closer examination, how-ever, it appears that all the commotion was excessive.

The interview invited so much attention because of Chen's supposedly strong and unsubmissive posture toward China, as well as a quote about "refusing to succumb to US pressure" on issues such as national referendums. But after reading both the Post article and the transcript of the conversation between Chen and the Post's Beijing correspondent, John Pomfret, one can hardly find anything that Chen hasn't said before.

From statements about Taiwan "[taking] our own road" and "one country on each side [of Taiwan Strait]" to talks about holding national referendums and rewriting the Constitution, to rebuttals about the existence of a "one China" principle, to refusal to acknowledge the so-called "1992 consensus" between China and Taiwan, nothing was new. The people of Taiwan have heard it all before. Even Chen's language wasn't much stronger than he has used before.

Nowhere in the Post article, however, is a quote from Chen about "refusing to succumb to US pressure." Instead it was Pomfret who made the observation, "Chen said he would not bow to US pressure," after quoting Chen as saying, when asked about US pressure regard his recent moves (ie, rewriting the Constitution and national referendums) was, "Any kind of democratic reform is our own affair. I don't think any democratic country can oppose democratic ideals."

The Chinese-language transcripts provided by the Presidential Office cite Chen as saying, "Any kind of democratic reform is the internal affair of Taiwan and the ideals and goals to be pursued by the 23 million Taiwanese people, which is [not something] that any other country can oppose and restrict. The US is a democratic country, [and therefore] will naturally respect the choice and decisions of the people of another country."

Whether Pomfret's observation was correct is open for discussion. While some people may agree, others could say that Chen was simply dodging the question by noting that Washington repeatedly has said that it takes no position on Taiwan's domestic affairs.

For example, in response to an inquiry last month about Taiwan's plan to hold a referendum on the issue of World Health Organization (WHO) participation, US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's said that such a referendum would not be particularly helpful to that cause. He then said "this is the business of the people of Taiwan, not the United States."

The typical US response to any issues regarding Taiwan follows a basic framework -- stressing the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, acknowledging a duty to assist Taiwan's self defense under the Taiwan Relations Act, recognizing the "one China" principle" and otherwise leaving things up to the two sides of Taiwan Strait.

In view of this, since Boucher's response to Chen's interview remained within the four corners of these long-existing US policies, it is really nothing extraordinary. Nevertheless, the pro-unification media in Taiwan has blown the Post interview completely out of proportion. For example, the Post article was titled "Chen dismisses fears in US of rising tension," yet some media translated the word "dismiss" as "contemptuously repel". Talk about outrageous comments.

The singnificance of referendums

By Liang Wen-chieh

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) feel that the Pinglin referendum has offered a good opportunity to oppose consultative referendums, which by Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou have been likened to the Cultural Revolution and called "the source of chaos." But is this really the way things are?

In Western Europe, consultative referendums are the norm. As an example, 17 of the 29 referendums concerning European integration have been consultative. Although Denmark, Norway, Finland, Greece and Italy all have complete systems for holding binding referendums, they have all held consultative referendums without having a legal foundation for doing so. The UK, which has no referendum legislation at all, has held a consultative referendum on the issue of whether or not to remain in the EU. Belgium and Luxemburg "only" have a consultative referendum system. Spain and Sweden have a system allowing both binding and consultative referendums.

Local legislatures in Japan can promulgate their own referendum regulations, but only as long as they are concerned with consultative referendums. In the US, every state but Delaware has a system allowing a referendum to be held on public initiative. Each state, however, often hold consultative referendums.

Why are consultative referendums so common? This varies between countries. In the UK, the idea that places parliament above all else does not allow for binding referendums, which makes consultative referendums necessary.

In Denmark, the constitution specifies that any piece of legislation giving up sovereignty to an international organization must be subjected to a referendum. How-ever, the 27 Feb. 1986 referendum on the Single Market did not fall under this category. As a result, the issue led to strong inter-party opposition. The solution to the stalemate was to hold a consultative referendum.

Although Swedish legislation stipulates that any constitutional amendment must be decided in a referendum, the referendums on whether or not to start driving on the right side of the road in 1955 and whether or not to stop using nuclear power in 1980 had to be consultative in nature.

As a result of 19th Century populism, each state in the US has a complete system for initiative and referendum, while state legislatures and governments often decide to put issues of major importance before the public. Two examples of this are the 1997 and last year's consultative referendums in Oregon asking whether or not to authorize the State Lottery Bond Program to finance public school projects and whether or not to increase the cigarette tax and use the revenue for the health plan and other programs, respectively.

Although the situation varies from country to country, the basic rea-son why the consultative referendum has such staying power lies in its fundamental difference from opinion polls. There is a cost involved for anyone about to vote. Maybe voters have to take time off from work, or they may have to walk or even spend money on transportation to get to the voting station. They also have to spend time gathering relevant information, listen to arguments for and against the issue at hand, and may campaign for or against it.

A telephone interview involves none of these costs. If the result of a referendum shows that 60 percent of voters oppose the construction of a certain railroad, the strength of that result is many times higher than that of an opinion poll showing the same result. Further, the active participation of voters in the referendum process carries a deeper democratic significance than the passive participation in an interview. These are the reasons why, despite the perfection of current opinion poll techniques, national governments still prefer to let people show their preferences in a vote.

From this perspective, a consultative referendum is not a "fake" referendum. The real problem lies in what happens if the result is not respected. This will not happen in a nationwide referendum, because no political party would dare go against the result of a referendum. In a local referendum, however, the result may be overridden by a higher level of government due to the difference in jurisdiction between the central and local governments.

California is fond of holding referendums, be it consultative or binding. However, in all the referendums held in California between 1960 and 1980, there were only three instances where the result was not declared partially or fully invalid by the state legislature or a state or federal court.

In 1996, in Japan, a referendum in Okinawa decided in favor of closing a US military base, but the existence of US military bases is regulated by international treaties and thus fall outside the jurisdiction of a local government.

But we cannot extrapolate from this and say that there is no sense in holding a consultative referendum. Even though referendums initiated by Californians often are deemed invalid, the referendum process brings systemic relief to racial conflict and the rich-poor divide.

Although the residents of Okinawa were unable to close the US military base, they obtained invaluable material gains and dignity. Following the Okinawa referendum, the Japanese have initiated almost 300 referendums.

In California, there are an average of 30 such referendum initiatives each year.

As these examples show, Ma's statement that consultative referendums are sources of chaos is clearly wrong. He says, however, that he will persuade the KMT to work for a referendum law, and that is commendable.

Liang Wen-chieh is deputy director of the DPP's Policy Coordination Committee.

Why Chen wants to write a new constitution

By Liu Kuan-teh

President Chen Shui-bian's announcement that he wants to write a new constitution in 2006 has resulted in bickering between the ruling and the opposition parties. Although Chen portrayed his idea as an attempt to initiate constitutional reform on key issues, some accused him of trying to provoke China and create electoral momentum for the pan-green camp. Others portrayed the statement as an attempt to push for de jure independence.

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan even belittled Chen's new pledge as "nonsense." Aside from political trash talking, attention must focus on why Chen raised such a highly sensitive issue at this moment and how much a new constitution means to Taiwan.

First, just because China might be angered by Chen's statement does not mean it will automatically be an electoral plus for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). When the KMT was the ruling party, it tried to brainwash the voters into be-lieving it would be disastrous for the opposition to win power. Even on the eve of the last presidential election, then Chinese premier Zhu Rongji warned Taiwanese voters not to choose Chen for president. The result was a drop in Chen's support rating. Therefore, the assumption that electoral concerns are the key to Chen's new announcement lacks empirical evidence.

If it's not for the sake of the election, is Chen trying to distract public attention from the sluggish economy to ideological debate? The fact is, the economy is gradually recovering and the stock market is rebounding. The so-called "it's the economy, stupid" imprecation may have little impact on the March election. In this regard, Chen's aim is to control the election tempo by utilizing the public's desire for political reform, including reducing the number of seats in the legislature and reforming both the electoral system and five-branch system of government.

Second, why is pushing for a new constitution important? To differentiate a great leader and a good leader, the key lies in who can offer a clearer vision for the country. While attacking Chen for being unable to present a bright future for Taiwan, Lien and his colleagues in the pan-blue camp have yet to offer a workable al-ternative for the voter.

The Constitution, which was enacted in China in 1947, is unsuitable for the politics of today. Even though it was amended six times by the KMT, major questions regarding the structure of the government and other reforms were ignored. This is the main cause of government stagnation and the lack of a clear division of labor between the president and the premier. An overhaul of the Constitution requires amendments to more than half its articles. In this regard, a new constitution is constructive to the nation's constitutional development.

Pushing for a new constitution is to lay a solid foundation for Taiwan's institutionalization. Without institutionalization, politics will degenerate into endless finger-pointing and government inefficiency. This is a matter of development.

A national leader should present views with such a vision and this is what a responsible government should do. The issues of constitutional reform and writing a new constitution should not be considered merely a conspiracy to seek independence.

As former vice president, Lien should know better than anyone the need to reconstruct the political system. He may not agree with the proposal Chen offered with respect to creating a new constitution. However, he can not simply run away from such an important subject.

If Chen's plan was characterized by Lien as "nonsense," may we ask Lien: "What is your blueprint for Taiwan's future?"

Liu Kuan-teh is a political commentator based in Taipei.