20031020

China on blue camp's side: legislator

By Melody Chen

STAFF REPORTER

Chinese officials have attempted to influence next year's presidential election by asking an influential Taiwanese Buddhist master to support the opposition camp, a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmaker alleged yesterday.

Former Chinese ambassador to Washington Yang Jiechi visited Master Hsin Yun in Hsi Lai Temple in California last December to deliver a message from Wen Jiabao, then China's vice premier, said DPP Legislator Charles Chiang.

Wen hoped the monk could mobilize religious resources to help Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan and his running-mate, People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong, Chiang said.

In April, Wang Mingjian, an official from China's Taiwan Affairs Office, visited Hsin Yun at the temple to make the same request, he said.

Chiang, who published five facts accusing China of helping the opposition parties' election campaign last week, said "very reliable" sources told him about the meetings between the Chinese officials and Hsin Yun.

"Hsin Yun, with virtue and wisdom, rejected China's request. I applaud his fortitude and would like to call him a patriotic monk," Chiang said.

Chiang, however, admitted to not contacting Hsin Yun to confirm the existence of the meetings.

The DPP has been exchanging fire with the pan-blue camp over whether China has secretly supported the KMT and the PFP since President Chen Shui-bian made that allegation in an interview with the Washington Post.

KMT Legislator Cheng Feng-shih dismissed Chiang's charge as ridiculous.

"China has always kept a distance from religious groups," Cheng said.

"The Chinese government has never been interested in religious groups. The Falun Gong sect has brought quite enough trouble for the government," Cheng said.

"How is it be possible that the Chinese government would want to use religious groups or a Taiwanese Buddhist leader to influence the presidential election? The accusation is rather improper," Cheng added.

KMT Legislator Kwan Yuk-noan said the DPP government should review its practice of linking politics with religion.

"Taiwan's Presbyterian churches have always supported Taiwan's independence. Their participation in politics is a typical example of religious intervention in politics," Kwan said.

"Chiang's accusation is groundless and false," Kwan said.

PFP spokesman Hwang Yih-jiau said Chiang has lost credibility over the comments.

"Chiang's comments are always dominated by ideology. The PFP doesn't want to comment on what he said. It doesn't matter what other people say about the PFP. What matters is what the PFP has actually done," Hwang said.

The Fo Kuang Shan monastery in Kaohsiung, which is funded by Hsin Yun, was unable to respond to Chiang's remarks yesterday.

The monastery has a worldwide temple network. Hsin Yun, 77, was born in China and once served as a soldier and a high-ranking official in the KMT, according to Chiang.

Lee Yuan-tseh asks China to put aside conditions for talks

By Huang Tai-lin

STAFF REPORTER , IN BANGKOK

Lee Yuan-tseh, head of Academia Sinica and President Chen Shui-bian's special emissary to APEC, yesterday suggested that China put aside preconditions for cross-strait talks, adding that the "1992 consensus" should not be used as a basis for the resumption of dialogue.

"The best way way to resume dialogue between the two sides of the Strait is to put aside disagreements, just as both sides had done in 1992," said Lee Cher-jean, spokeswoman of Taiwan's APEC delegation at a press conference

Lee Yuan-tseh told the BBC and Reuters yesterday that the term "1992 census" has been controversial, while stressing the need for both sides to resume dialogue.

The spokeswoman said Lee was asked during the interview whether he has the chance to speak with Chinese President Hu Jintao.

Lee Yuan-tseh said that only if China puts aside its preconditions can mutual understanding and reconciliation take place.

The spokeswoman said, "Dr. Lee believes that the best way is to put aside disagreement and sit down to have a good talk."

When asked in the interview about what kind of message he would like to convey to US President George W. Bush, Lee Yuan-tseh said Chen had instructed him to pass on that Taiwan will observe the `fives noes.'"

Chen made the `five noes' pledge in his inauguration speech in 2000. The "noes" are: no declaration of independence, no changes in the country's name, not writing the state-to-state model into the Constitution, no referendum on Taiwan's future and no abolition of the unification guidelines.

Lee said that he had also been instructed by Chen to stress to Bush that Taiwan is not a troublemaker.

"Plans to hold referendums and to rewrite the Constitution stem from public opinion and the rewriting of Constitution is to be in line with reality," Lee said.

"These issues are not related to the issue of Taiwan independence or Taiwan's unification with China," Lee said.

Lee told his interviewers that China-based Taiwanese businesspeople have made great contributions to the growth and development of China's economy.

"So both sides should cooperate in this regard," he said.

Bush rejects non-aggression pact

NUCLEAR CRISIS: The US president said he won't sign a treaty with North Korea renouncing an invasion, but said he is open to some other kind of agreement

AP , BANGKOK

"We will not have a treaty, if that's what you're asking. That's off the table."－George W. Bush, US president

US President George W. Bush yesterday rejected North Korea's demand that the US sign a non-aggression pact in exchange for nuclear concessions. But the president said he would try with Asian leaders to find other ways to end the standoff.

China's president, Hu Jintao, said after a meeting with Bush that his country would try to get six-country talks going again in an attempt to persuade North Korea to dismantle its nuclear program. The two leaders apparently also discussed issues related to the China-Taiwan relationship.

The two leaders indicated there might be room for an agreement of some sort to satisfy North Korea's security concerns.

Before the meeting with Hu, Bush reiterated that the US has no intention of invading North Korea, but rejected the idea of a formal non-aggression treaty.

"We think there's an opportunity to move the process forward, and we're going to discuss it with our partners," Bush said ahead of a 21-nation Asia-Pacific economic conference. "We will not have a treaty, if that's what you're asking. That's off the table."

But, Bush said, "Perhaps there are other ways we can look at, to say exactly what I've said publicly, on paper, with our partners' consent."

Bush, speaking with reporters during a meeting with Thailand's prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, rejected all comparisons between the US standoff with North Korea and the situation in Iraq, which the US invaded on the grounds that it threatened its neighbors and the world.

"I've said as plainly as I can say that we have no intention of invading North Korea," Bush said. "And I've also said as plainly as I can say that we expect North Korea to get rid of her nuclear weapons ambitions."

Short of a formal treaty, US Secretary of State Colin Powell has been exploring the possibility of a written statement that might satisfy North Korean demands for a non-aggression promise.

However, Bush said it was important to remember that "the burden is on North Korea, not America."

Meanwhile, Bush announced that the US and Thailand would begin negotiations on a free-trade agreement between the two countries. The US recently entered into such an agreement with Singapore.

Such a deal "will provide increased access to [Thailand's] large and growing market for US farmers, manufacturers and service industries," Bush said.

Bush also promised to increase US-Thai military cooperation in a move widely seen as a reward for Thailand's role in the capture of an al-Qaeda-linked terror suspect in August.

As Bush arrived for talks with Asian leaders ahead of the economic conference, protests in Bangkok were light, partly due to unprecedented security, and government pressure kept demonstrators far from the site.

About 1,000 protesters gathered at a Bangkok university yesterday to demonstrate against the summit, calling Bush "the world's real terrorist."

It is imperative that Taiwan comes up with its own constitution soon, as the ROC Constitution is bizarre and outdated, Lee Hung-hsi, a constitutional expert, said at a seminar held by Taiwan New Century Foundation yesterday. The aim of the seminar was to outline the process for a new constitution.

"It [the Constitution] deviates from international standards, as it does not clearly state whether our government follows a presidential or a cabinet system, nor does it separate government administration from the legislature," Lee said.

Four distinguished international academics attending the seminar agreed upon a systemic process to establish a new constitution for Taiwan. They said that such a process can only be executed by holding a referendum.

"There is a trend in the international community that a referendum should be held to decide on constitutional amendments. The most basic reason for this trend is that the constitution should come from the people," Chen Lung-chu, chairman of the foundation and advisor to President Chen Shui-bian, said.

Chen Lung-chu added that the highest constitutional power is citizens' participation, which is also the essence of democracy.

Lee questioned the legality of the current Constitution, saying that the ROC Constitution was not a result of the will of the Taiwanese people, and therefore it should not be applicable to Taiwan.

According to Lee, the ROC Constitution was drafted and passed in China between 1936 and 1947. At that time, Taiwan was under Japanese occupation, so technically Taiwan still belonged to Japan when Chiang Kai-shek brought the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to Taiwan in 1949.

"Although former president Lee Teng-hui amended the Constitution six times during his administration, the amendments were primarily for the good of Taiwan's democracy, not for a firm structure for nation building -- the essence of what a constitution should be," Chin Heng-wei, a political analyst, said.

Lee Hung-hsi said the process of promoting a new constitution is only feasible if the president is re-elected next year.

"I have known President Chen since he was young, and it has been his long-term wish to push for a new constitution. Therefore, bringing up this issue so close to the election is definitely not a campaign gimmick," Lee said.

Wu Shuh-min, a national policy advisor to the president, said that the current system of education fails to teach students about Taiwan's political history.

The Economist magazine recently ran an article analyzing the campaign pushing for a change to Taiwan's official name, saying that "if ex-President Lee [Teng-hui] has his way, it is the KMT [Chinese Nationalist Party] that will spend the campaign defending the indefensible." Around the same time, Lee claimed in an interview with the Japanese media that, next year, he would mobilize 500,000 people to take to the streets in support of President Chen Shui-bian's [re-election bid].

These two articles reported in the foreign media show that although Lee has stepped down as president, he is still very influential in Taiwan's political arena.

So where does Lee gain his power? How can he single-handedly make "Chinese people" on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait terror-stricken?

Traditionally, the relations between "nation" and "nationality" can be divided into two levels: A nation's existence is related to "sovereignty," while a nationality's existence involves "identity." Although both sovereignty and identity are imaginary, they are catalytic elements for the construction of a country. In other words, if these two elements conform to legal conditions and value standards, they can muster forces in the civic society and transform into a powerful, security entity to oppose foreign enemies.

Faced with Taiwan's struggle for independence, China has been using the "one China" principle to assert its sovereignty claim over Taiwan and contain Taiwan's claim over its own sovereignty.

This is why Lee and Chen have to strongly counter China in their discourse on Taiwan's sovereignty when they control the state machine. Otherwise, the loss of sovereignty will endanger Taiwan's survival. Both the "special state-to-state relations" and "one country on either side [of the Taiwan Strait]" platforms are actually a protective entity built in the face of Beijing's "one China" ideology.

Furthermore, to legitimize this protective entity, Lee came up with a "bandit theory" following the Qiandao Lake robbery and mass murder case in 1994, and Chen accused China of exercising "war terrorism" by deploying 400 missiles aimed at Taiwan. They have transformed the imaginary sovereignty discourse into a logical relationship between security and language.

Of course, the imaginary structure of the sovereignty-security discourse proposed by Lee and Chen would unavoidably collide with the real sovereignty-missiles structure discourse claimed by China. China has not obtained an absolute advantage from the collision over the past decades. Instead, Taiwan is winning increasing support at home and abroad for its sovereignty claim.

Internationally, with the US' strong support, Taiwan has nothing to fear when it comes to security. Domestically, more and more Taiwanese people choose to accept the discourse presented by Lee and Chen, making it difficult for the pan-blue camp to win over popular support for their sovereignty platform. No wonder the pan-blue camp is terrified by the force generated by the Lee-Chen alliance.

On the other hand, through the campaign pushing for a change to Taiwan's official name, Lee has transformed the nationality-identity idea into a new image in Taiwan's pursuit of survival. This image will marginalize the original entity in Taiwan (the pan-blue camp and the Republic of China).

There is no need for Lee to come up with any new method. As long as he implements the "nationality-security-identity" politics, the KMT not only will have to be nervous but also, like Hsu, will easily crumple and disappear from Taiwan's political arena.

Wang Kun-yi is an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies of Tamkang University.

Taiwan has changed dramatically since the lifting of martial law and the nation's accompanying democratization.

So, too, has Taiwan's foreign policy. The changes associated with democratization, and their consequences, raise important questions concerning the making of Taiwan's foreign policy. How will foreign policy be made? What will be the role of the president, the bureaucracy, the legislature and non-governmental actors?

When discussing the making of foreign policy in Washington, a political scientist once observed that "the pieces of the foreign policy package are scattered all over town."

This observation applies with special force to foreign policy decision making in Taipei. Numerous governmental institutions now play a role in shaping foreign policy. Perhaps most intriguing, however, is President Chen Shui-bian's advancement of "people's diplomacy" or "people-to-people-diplomacy."

The Chen administration contends that creative means of diplomacy must be pursued if Taiwan is to successfully circumvent the growing economic, political and military power of China.

By employing a variety of unconventional diplomatic tactics that fall under the broad rubric of "people-to-people diplomacy," Taipei is seeking, with some degree of success, to boost its international profile and improve relations with foreign nations. These tactics include the use of inter-parliamentary diplomacy, party-to-party diplomacy and non-governmental organization (NGO) diplomacy.

Inter-parliamentary diplomacy calls for Taiwan's lawmakers to become involved in international affairs and develop relationships with legislators in other democracies. And it has contributed to a string of small victories for Taipei.

For example, the US Congress has passed a series of pro-Taiwan resolutions and laws, including a demand that the Bush administration treat Taiwan as a non-NATO ally.

Taiwanese lawmakers also played an important role in convincing American lawmakers to establish a new bi-partisan, pro-Taiwan association in the US Congress -- the Taiwan Caucus.

The European Parliament, the only popularly elected legislative body that represents all the citizens of the EU's 15 member states, has passed a variety of pro-Taiwan resolutions. These range from demands that China remove the roughly 350 missiles it has deployed directly opposite Taiwan to pleas for the international community to support Taiwan's bid for membership in the WHO.

Party-to-party diplomacy involves Taiwanese political parties establishing friendly ties with their foreign counterparts and joining inter-party organizations.

Taiwan does enjoy deep support among a wide range of foreign political parties -- particularly America's political parties. But even minor Taiwanese parties have discovered that their counterparts overseas will support the country if threatened by China.

For example, when the PRC conducted a series of provocative "missile tests" off Taiwan's coastline in 1996, Taiwan's Green Party appealed to the European Federation of Green Parties for support.

Finally, the Chen administration has seized upon the idea of increased NGO participation as a means by which the public can help raise Taiwan's international profile and ultimately help the government achieve its diplomatic goals.

NGOs are viewed as a vital part of the drive to use more unconventional diplomatic tactics to achieve foreign policy goals.

As Taiwan's foreign minister, observed, it is "crucial for all the people of Taiwan to engage in diplomatic work."

It is believed that many of Taiwan's NGOs are actively engaged in such activities.

For example, in January 2001, the Taiwan International Medical Alliance was established by a group of medical professionals. The organization has one key objective: to help Taipei achieve its long-standing goal of becoming a member of the WHO. The Taiwanese now participate in over 1,000 NGOs.

A vast majority of the Taiwanese population support recent moves to employ people-to-people diplomacy and other unconventional tactics to achieve the nation's foreign policy goals.

As one Taiwanese lawmaker quipped, most agree with the old adage that "diplomacy is too important to be left to the diplomats."

Obviously, people-to-people diplomacy is not the only factor or perhaps even a critical determinant when one seeks to explain how Taiwan manages successfully to circumvent a powerful foe determined to isolate it internationally and engineer its demise as a sovereign state.

However, Taiwan's novel approach to international relations is certainly a contributing factor and one that merits further study and investigation.

Dennis Hickey is professor of Political Science and University Fellow in Research at Southwest Missouri State University.

Those of us who have watched the Democratic Progressive Party with sympathy since its funding 17 years ago have learned never to underestimate its ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. And overwhelmingly the reason for this has been interpersonal rivalries within the party. Of course all political parties are full of rivalries. But in most there is an understanding that what matters for any party most of all is power. Lose it and you lose everything. In the end, therefore, a compromise has to be reached between the ambitious, in which the interests of the party have to be put first and ambition must take a back seat.

Perhaps it is because the DPP is such a new party that it seems not to understand this. Maybe it is because the party still represents a coming together of disparate people having independent power bases as a result of their status as tang wai activists, rather than a cadre raised by and in the party owing their stature to the party alone and consequently more reluctant to challenge it. Whatever, the mood of fratricide stalking the party over the issue of who is to run as Chen Shui-bian's running mate shows the DPP, like the Bourbons, has "learned nothing and forgotten nothing."

Annette Lu wants another four years as vice president. Some in the DPP are opposed to this. The pro-Lu camp has two factions, those who like Lu's outspokenness, and those who think for Chen to choose anyone other than Lu would be to anoint a successor, which for reasons of factional weakness they want to avoid. There are also rumors that Lu is threatening to release a book chronicling the snafus of the Chen administration should she not be chosen, basically blackmailing her way onto the ticket.

Looking at Lu's candidacy from first principles, will it, compared with the other options, enhance or diminish Chen's chances? Evidence from polls suggests the latter.

As to Lu's performance, so much of what she has both done and said recently has been embarrassing balderdash, aimed not at the country or even the party but at some strange vanity project of her own. Hearing Lu speak on international affairs -- which were supposed to be her forte -- has become excruciatingly embarrassing. Her lecture to the military two years ago on Taiwan's "soft power" and "Hello Kitty personality" and the need to become a "cuddly country adored by the international community" showed a deplorable lack of gravitas; nothing she has said since has shown this deficiency to be only temporary. To those who do not thrill to Lu's anti-China drum-banging -- the very voters Chen must carry to win re-election -- Lu has become a joke.

This raises two problems. Unless Chen wins this is likely to be the last democratic presidential election Taiwan holds -- the blue camp now being so completely the tail wagged by China's dog. If Lu is threatening to use her book as a weapon, we have to ask if she is prepared to see the destruction of Taiwan's independence and political and social freedoms just out of a sense of wounded self-esteem?

The second problem is that if not Lu, then who? What is needed, for the good of the party, is a decision process that all can agree on, the results of which all will respect. The real problem is that due to Chen's playing with this topic in hints and suggestions, and arrogating the decision to himself rather than a more democratic process, it is now virtually too late for such a decision to be taken. Once again bad blood and bruised egos might be the undoing of the DPP in an election that is far too important to lose.