Falun Gong man describes Shanghai ordeal

By Debby Wu

STAFF REPORTER

Thursday, Oct 30, 2003,Page 2

"The bureau wanted me to serve as an undercover agent for them in Taiwan, to investigate Falun Gong practices. They warned that they knew everything about me and they would have me exiled from Taiwan if I told the public anything about what the bureau did to me."

－Lin Hsiao-kai

A tired and hesitant Lin Hsiao-kai finally showed his face to the public yesterday, revealing a spiritually battered man who has yet to recover from a nightmare trip to Shanghai.

"When I was finally released by the National Security Bureau in Shanghai and returned home, the first words I spoke to my wife the minute I saw her were, `Could I trust you? Would you betray me?'" Lin said.

Lin said that his paranoia was a result of the confusion stemming from his dealing with the Chinese security agents.

The 29-year-old Lin traveled to Shanghai on Sept. 30 to bring latest Falun Gong information to a Chinese Falun Gong practitioner.

Lin was later introduced to another Falun Gong practitioner, who turned out to be an undercover Chinese security agent.

Lin was arrested at his hotel by the security officials on Oct 7. He was released three days ago and returned home the same day.

He said that throughout his detention he had treated the Chinese officials nicely and that sometimes they were nice but they really wanted to brainwash him or get information on Taiwanese Falun Gong practitioners.

He said he became confused and didn't know whether to believe what the officials said. He also said that he was so scared that he suspected people around him might be other undercover agents sent to monitor him.

"The bureau wanted me to serve as an undercover agent for them in Taiwan, to investigate Falun Gong practices. They warned that they knew everything about me and they would have me exiled from Taiwan if I told the public anything about what the bureau did to me," Lin said.

He said the bureau officials proved during the interrogations that they did know almost everything about him and that really frightened him.

He said he was forced to sign some documents admitting his "crimes" and renouncing Falun Gong.

But Lin said that he had not been physically abused

"The bureau officials changed their attitude after my wife held a press conference to publicize my detention," Lin said. "In the end it was the pressure from the media that made the bureau let me go, although the official kept saying it was the tolerance and the policy of the Communist Party."

Lin's wife, Chen Shu-ya ,held a press conference on Oct. 21 to draw attention to his disappearance. She told reporters that the family had not heard from Lin since Oct. 7.

Lin said he was very grateful for the media's interest in his case.

Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Chiu Chuang-chin said yesterday that Lin's experience was proof that China's intelligence services had penetrated Taiwan.

Chiu said he would ask national security authorities to investigate the situation.

China removes Taiwan from textbooks

CENSORED: Legislators fear that Taiwanese children in China are getting a warped view of the country since communist authorities are editing their textbooks

By Jewel Huang

STAFF REPORTER

Thursday, Oct 30, 2003,Page 2

China has been deleting references to Taiwan in textbooks used by Taiwanese schools in China, confusing students about their national identity, lawmakers said yesterday.

Showing textbooks collected from the schools, Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) Legislator Lo Chih-ming pointed out that any words referring to the "Republic of China [ROC]," "New Taiwan dollar," "ROC Constitution" or illustrations such as the ROC's national flag or emblem in the books had been erased or covered up.

"In other words, the ROC does not, and cannot exist, in the textbooks that Taiwanese businessmen's children use," Lo said.

Lo said that textbooks with fragmented information would only confuse children.

"Children who continue their studies in Taiwan in the future will have difficulty in identifying their own country. I believe they will suffer from schizophrenia," Lo said.

The textbooks used by schools set up for businesspeople' children are printed by Taiwanese publishers and are the same as those used in schools in Taiwan.

In addition to the textbooks, Lo said, China assigns a vice principal to monitor teaching and textbooks used in the schools.

TSU Legislator Cheng Chen-lung also prepared an array of materials demonstrating the same problem. Cheng displayed Guangdong Province's rules that require the word "Taiwan" to be changed to "Taiwan Province." Guangdong authories also say that "the expression or ideas involving attacking China or harming national emotions need to be deleted."

According to the Ministry of Education, there are about 1,536 students studying in two schools for Taiwanese businesspeople's children -- the Dongguan School for Taiwan Businesspeople's Children in Guandong Province and the Huadong Taiwanese Children's School in Jiangsu Province.

The schools teach from kindergarten to senior high school level.

In July, the ministry opened four schools in Kinmen to accept businesspeople's children from Xiamen, but only 33 students have enrolled in the program.

Under intense questioning from lawmakers, Minister of Education Huang Jong-tsun said the ministry had already identified the problem and had taken steps to amend it.

Huang said the ministry's Mainland Affairs Division had been holding summer camps since 1999 to teach children subjects they were prevented from studying in China and strengthening their knowledge of Taiwan's culture and society.

"We have insisted on our standpoint that the Chinese authorities can only truncate the contents but cannot add anything like propaganda," Huang said, adding that the ministry allocated NT$2 million every year to help the two schools give their students an education comparable to that in Taiwan.

Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Tu Wen-ching suggested that the ministry and the legislature's Education and Culture Committee should visit the two schools. Tu asked the Mainland Affairs Council to help arrange such a trip.

Council Vice Chairman Alexander Huang said that if the committee passed such a resolu-tion, the council would handle the case according to regulations.

President shows gratitude to European parliament's Taiwan Friendship Group

CNA , TAIPEI

Thursday, Oct 30, 2003,Page 4

President Chen Shui-bian said yesterday he is grateful for the European Parliament's support for Taiwan's cause and its concern about security in the Taiwan Strait.

Chen made the remarks during a meeting with a parliamentary delegation led by Gerard Collins, vice chairman of the parliament's Taiwan Friendship Group, which arrived Monday on a goodwill visit.

Thanks to the group's efforts, Chen said, Taiwan-EU relations have made substantial progress since the Taiwan Friendship Group's formation in 1991.

Last year, Chen noted, Taiwan-EU trade amounted to US$28.9 billion, making the EU the nation's third-largest trading partner and Taiwan the EU's 11th-largest trading partner.

Thanks to the Taiwan Friendship Group's endeavors, Chen said, the European Parliament has passed numerous resolutions expressing support for Taiwan's situation and concern about cross-strait stability.

Just a week ago, the parliament passed a resolution urging the two sides of the Taiwan Strait to resume peaceful dialogue and resolve their disputes by peaceful means.

The resolution also urged China to dismantle missiles targeting Taiwan. Twelve of the 15 EU member states have set up representative offices in Taipei while the EU headquarters also opened a representative office in Taipei earlier this year.

"These developments serve to illustrate the cordiality that exists between the two sides," Chen said.

He also expressed his gratitude for the parliament's passage of a resolution supporting Taiwan's bid to participate in the World Health Assembly as well as the hospitality extended to ROC first lady Wu Shu-chen during her visit to the parliament in 2001 to receive the Freedom Prize on his behalf.

Chen also took advantage of the occasion to brief his guests on the government's plan to hold a referendum on several major public issues and to form a new constitution.

Cabinet gives nod to referendum law

PEOPLE POWER: Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou, however, attacked the Cabinet's version of the law as being unconstitutional and a danger to the political structure

By Ko Shu-ling

STAFF REPORTER

Thursday, Oct 30, 2003,Page 3

Complying with a request by opposition lawmakers, the Executive Yuan yesterday approved a draft referendum law, but Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou said it "contravened the Constitution."

"I'm afraid it would sabotage the check-and-balance mechanism between the executive and legislative branches stipulated in the Constitution if the Cabinet's draft passes into law," Ma told reporters after the weekly closed-door Cabinet meeting yesterday morning.

According to Ma, the draft fails to specify its legal basis, which is articles 17 and 136 of the Constitution.

"In addition, the Cabinet risks trampling on the Constitution if it seeks to initiate a referendum because such a prerogative requires a legal revision to the Constitution," Ma said.

Eligible members of the electorate and the head of state can also file a request.

"If the government was authorized to call a referendum, it could veto any laws or resolutions passed by the legislature which it felt unhappy about," Ma said. "It would not only undermine the check-and-balance system between the executive and legislative branches but also result in political unrest."

The Constitution mandates that if the government wants to overturn a law or resolution passed by the legislature that it deems difficult to implement, the Cabinet must send a request to the president within 10 days of receiving the written text of the law from the legislature. If the president agrees, he must then send the request to the legislature.

Lawmakers are required to reach a final decision within 15 days of receiving the request. If more than half of the 225-member legislature vetoes the request, the Cabinet must accept the passed law or resolution. The law or resolution will then go into effect three days after it is promulgated by the president.

But if lawmakers fail to reach a final decision before the deadline, the passed law or resolution automatically becomes invalid.

Ma said Switzerland was a good example of a country where the government does not have the right to initiate a referendum.

"Only nine European countries' governments enjoy the right to call a referendum, but it's clearly stipulated in their constitutions," Ma said.

Minister without Portfolio Hsu Chih-hsiung, who was responsible for reviewing the Cabinet's draft, disagreed.

"It's an oxymoron that only people can initiate a referendum in Switzerland because its Constitution mandates that a quorum of 50,000 eligible voters can file a petition or eight out of its 26 states can do so if they manage to collect sufficient signatures to call a referendum," Hsu said, suggesting that to file the petition did not necessarily mean a referendum must be held. "Apparently, Mayor Ma has mixed up a petition with a referendum."

Hsu also said that the Cabinet's draft does not contradict the Constitution because legislative approval would be needed for Cabinet-initiated referendums.

Hsu also dismissed Ma's concerns that the draft would encourage the government to settle certain disagreements between the Cabinet and the legislature via popular votes instead of proposing a veto motion in the legislature.

"While a veto motion is for settling intractable differences between the executive and legislative branches via a showdown vote in the legislature, a referendum is to settle a controversial issue with a less drastic measure -- a popular vote," Hsu said.

Echoing Hsu's argument, Cabinet Spokesman Lin Chia-lung said that the two methods should be used together.

"What we're offering here is citizens' inalienable right to direct democracy as guaranteed by the Constitution, which is an alternative to prevent partisan confrontation in the legislature," he said.

The approval of the draft law was made in response to a request by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislative caucus. The caucus had threatened to boycott cross-party negotiations unless the Cabinet sent in its own version of the referendum law instead of endorsing a version presented by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

Executive Yuan defends death-penalty stipulation

By Ko Shu-ling

STAFF REPORTER

Thursday, Oct 30, 2003,Page 3

An anti-terrorism law approved by the Cabinet yesterday that includes the death sentence does not contradict the government's goal of abolishing executions, a Cabinet official said yesterday.

"It's indeed the ultimate goal of both the Presidential Office and the Executive Yuan to abolish the death penalty and we've been making efforts to achieve the goal," said Minister without Portfolio Hsu Chih-hsiung, who was in charge of reviewing the draft of the anti-terrorism act.

"However, it's a time-consuming process and can only be achieved by gradually phasing it out," Hsu said.

Among the obstacles the Cabinet faces are that the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) doesn't have an absolute majority in the legislature.

The proposal also lacks universal support among the public, some of whom fear that abolishing the death penalty might send the wrong message to violent criminals.

To gradually phase out the death penalty, Hsu said that the Cabinet has approved draft amendments to the Criminal Code.

The draft, which has been bogged down in the legislative process since October last year, would also make it harder for convicts serving a life sentence to get parole.

The draft would also raise the threshold for death-row inmates to get their sentences commuted.

Hsu made the remarks after the weekly closed-door Cabinet meeting in which it approved the draft bill of the anti-terrorism act.

Hsu said that the law aimed to bring Taiwan in line with global trends.

"According to the United Nations' Convention to prevent and punish acts of terrorism, it's advisable for all contracting states to adopt general standards that will progressively develop international law as regards cooperation in the prevention and punishment of terrorist activities," Hsu said.

Although Taiwan is not a member of the UN, as a part of the global community the nation is obliged to safeguard international peace, Hsu said.

According to the draft, terrorists convicted of engaging in terrorist activities and causing death would face a minimum sentence of 10 years in prison and a maximum of death.

A jail term of up to five years and a fine of up to NT$100 million could be imposed on those convicted of conspiring in terrorist activities. Those providing or soliciting funds to further a terrorist activity would be subject to a jail term of between one and seven years and a fine of up to NT$10 million.

If approved by the legislature, the draft will also empower the National Security Bureau to intercept wire, oral and electronic communications.

The bureau could authorize the installation and use of so-called tap-and-trace devices, which monitor callers' telephone numbers, anywhere in the country in the course of a criminal investigation.

Turning a funeral into a political hot potato

By Chin Heng-wei

Thursday, Oct 30, 2003,Page 8

`It is hilarious that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator John Chang ... also tried to stick his finger into the pie.'

Kung Ling-yi, a niece of the late Soong Mayling, better known as Madame Chiang Kai-shek, said recently that the family would hold a memorial service for Soong in New York and that they would like to invite President Chen Shui-bian to drape the Republic of China flag on her coffin.

Upon receiving this message, the Presidential Office expressed its respect for the relatives' arrangements and said the government would extend full support. The office also said that it had decided to accord state mourning for the former first lady.

What is interesting is that Chiang Fang Chih-yi -- widow of Chiang Hsiao-yung, a son of the late president Chiang Ching-kuo -- voiced her opposition to reporters, saying, "Would Madame Chiang be willing to have the national flag placed on her coffin by a president who does not recognize the ROC?"

There are no blood relations between Soong and Chiang Fang. Although Chiang Fang's statement was improper, at least she, as a member of Soong's in-laws, belongs to her family.

It is hilarious that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator John Chang, the bastard son of Chiang Ching-kuo, also tried to stick his finger into the pie. He said that it would be very inappropriate for a member of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) or the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) to conduct the flag-draping ceremony. Although Chang admitted that this matter will have to be finalized through family discussions, he claimed with certainty that "the family will decline [the offer] in the end."

Although Chang has managed to get Chiang Ching-kuo listed as his father on his ID card, he is still not accepted by the Chiang family. Therefore, anything about the "family" has nothing to do with him. He can neither participate in family discussions nor speak for them.

And this is still not the point. The point is: the Kungs' invitation for Chen to drape the flag over the coffin falls in line with the country's protocols and regulations. But Chiang Fang and Chang placed their "private domain" above the "public domain," exposing the pan-blue camp's mindset of refusing to recognize the DPP government or Chen.

They should understand that the person to drape the flag would be the president. Whether he is a DPP or TSU member should not be something that Soong or the Kungs find worrying.

Having lived in the US, Kung and her husband apparently understand the essence of a democratic society and its institutions. Just like the fact that George W. Bush is the US president -- no matter how much you dislike the Republican Party.

To be frank, Soong Mayling was closer to the Kung and Soong families than the Chiangs. She spent her latter years in New York. She was accompanied by the Kungs and Soongs, but not anyone from the Chiang family. Only the Kungs have the power to make the final decision whether she will be buried in the family cemetery in New York, rather than in Taipei as is the wish of the Chiang family.

Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.

Cross-strait talks after election: China

HOBSON'S DEMOCRACY: A spokesman for China's Taiwan Affairs Office says his nation respects the will of Taiwan's public, provided their will is the same as that of Beijing

By Melody Chen

STAFF REPORTER

Thursday, Oct 30, 2003,Page 1

The frozen dialogue between China and Taiwan will reopen after the March presidential election, a Beijing official said yesterday.

"Negotiations on cross-strait issues, including direct transportation between the two sides, shall not begin before next year's presidential election," Zhang Mingqing, spokesman for China's Taiwan Affairs Office, said.

After the election, Beijing will be willing to talk to "proper" Taiwanese delegates even though they might be from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Zhang said.

Both sides have to return to the "one China" consensus before talks could be reopened, he said.

However, the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), which got the cold shoulder from China after proposing a direct cargo transportation plan last month, insisted the "one China" concept should not be a precondition for talks.

Concerned that any talks or interactions between Beijing and Taipei before the election could give credit to the pro-independence DPP government, China has been silent on sensitive cross-strait issues.

But Beijing has been keeping a close eye on Taiwanese leaders' behavior, Zhang said.

"The Beijing authorities will be closely watching whether President Chen Shui-bian displays any `improper' gestures during his visit to the US," he warned.

Any moves that "directly affect China's ties with the US" and "cause cross-strait tensions" will be regarded as improper gestures, Zhang said.

Chen will fly to New York tomorrow to receive an award from the International League for Human Rights. The president is expected to deliver a speech during the awards ceremony.

Zhang said Beijing would not interfere with Chen's trip, which he described as Taiwan's "non-governmental" economic and cultural exchanges with the US.

"But we will voice opposition if Chen takes advantage of international occasions to create a `two Chinas' or `one China, one Taiwan' impression," Zhang said.

Responding to Chen's calls for a new constitution and national referendums -- which some political observers view as both a campaign strategy and as moves toward independence -- Zhang was careful not to offend Taiwan's electorate.

"We have repeatedly said we would respect the will of our Taiwanese compatriots," he said.

But he said China opposes political figures using the people's will as a tool to challenge the `one China' principle.

"Chen publicly promoted ideas to split Taiwan from China. [Vice President] Annette Lu also announced her goal for Taiwan's independence. Their behavior proved Chen's `five noes' promise is a lie," Zhang said.

Chen promised not to hold a referendum on independence when he announced his "five noes" during his inauguration speech.

Earlier this week, the MAC said China's criticisms of Taiwan's leaders were improper.

"Recently, Beijing authorities have directly criticized our president and vice president, distorted and misinterpreted their policies, and launched verbal intimidation," the council said in a statement.

China's moves are of no help to Taiwan's election and damage cross-strait peace and stability, the council added.

Although Beijing refuses to negotiate with Taiwan on the direct transportation plan ahead of the presidential election, the council said it would nevertheless prepare to implement the measure.

Editorial: Sychophancy still rules in the KMT

Chinese people are fond of talking about their "vast, great, refined and deep" culture. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan attested to this after returning from an overseas trip on Monday. More than 60 legislators were on hand to welcome him at the airport. That was on top of a number of KMT and People First Party (PFP) officials. This show of force meant that several committee meetings at the legislature had to be delayed or were canceled due to a lack of quorum.

The KMT's bureaucratic culture continues to paralyze the legislature even though Lien is just a presidential wannabe. It is all about face. The number of people seeing off or welcoming a politician is considered a indicator of power and popularity. If only a handful of people turn out to meet him or her, the politician is seen as unpopular and unfit for high office.

Apart from satisfying vanity, these hail and farewell gatherings are an opportunity to brown-nose one's superiors and seek advancement. Especially if the boss is normally very busy and inaccessible, such opportunities are a chance to remind people who you are and impress the boss so that he or she won't forget you when opportunities for promotion arise.

The large number of people who showed up to greet Lien on Monday sent a clear message: KMT and PFP politicians are quite confident about their parties' chances in next year's presidential election. They are therefore already jockeying for position five months before voting day, vying to kiss up to Lien.

Lien also believes he has already won the election. On the evening of Oct. 12, he met with Taiwanese students studying at Cambridge University's Trinity College. After the talk, he walked to Queen's College to attend a banquet. According to John Chang, a researcher from the Taiwan Research Institute who holds a doctorate from Cambridge, Lien chose to walk through the area whose scenery was made famous by early 20th-century Chinese poet Xu Zhimo and Taiwanese essayist Chen Chih-fan in their works.

But Lien was apparently uninterested in the scenery. He complained -- via the pan-blue media -- that the government's representative office in the UK had not taken good care of him. He was upset because the office had not arranged a car for him, thereby forcing him to "grope about and walk in the dark" and causing him to get lost on the way.

Diplomats from the office responded they had not arranged a car because Lien's own people had told them that he wanted to walk. They said the office had sent people to accompany Lien during the walk, so how did the talk about being discourteous come about?

Democratic Progressive Party Deputy Secretary-General Lee Ying-yuan noted that Tien Hung-mao, the government's top representative to the UK, went to meet Lien at the airport in London. Lee drew a comparison with US diplomatic protocol, saying that American Institute in Taiwan Director Douglas Paal did not go to meet former US vice president Al Gore at CKS International Airport when Gore visited Taipei. Lee could have also reminded the public that President Chen Shui-bian ordered a minimum of pomp for airport bon voyage and welcoming ceremonies after he took office because he thought they were a waste of time.

On Monday, Lien demonstrated that he found nothing wrong in the legislature grinding to a halt so that 60 legislators could be at the airport to welcome him home. Perhaps he wanted to get even with his political enemies for not treating him as an emperor. Such political sychophancy is common in totalitarian societies and banana republics -- it has no place in a modern democracy.

Democratization and foreign policy

By Nat Bellocchi

Thursday, Oct 30, 2003,Page 8

At this time, in East Asia, the US leadership is focusing its efforts on the North Korean nuclear problem, and now increasingly on the potential for terrorist activity in Southeast Asia. The former especially means working closely with China. In the Taiwan Strait, the US continues to work for a peaceful resolution of that issue. It also wants democracy to prevail. The first part is made very clear and supported with decisions on arms sales and cooperation in the security field. The second one gets more lip service than action, but it is admittedly a pretty difficult objective to deal with.

When a recognized state changes from an authoritarian regime to a democratic government, peacefully or otherwise, it requires much time before it becomes reasonably stabilized. It is never easy, and will never be complete.

Under normal circumstances countries that have gone through this change to democratization are recognized sovereign entities. Names may change, systems may change, but sovereignty remains. Taiwan's democratization, alas, is not a normal circumstance -- it carries an extra burden of being a contested sovereignty.

In 1979, the US switched recognition (but not sovereignty) to a China that insists sovereignty over Taiwan is theirs as well. To many in America at that time, accepting the Chinese position was worth gaining a stronger relationship with an important country. Many did not agree, however, and the Taiwan Relations Act, until this day, has made it very difficult to change. In addition, democratization of Taiwan greatly expanded the number of Americans that support the latter view.

Ironically, though the US strongly supported the change to democracy, it took the evolution of that system in Taiwan a decade before the meaning of this change with regard to the US-Taiwan relationship began to be under-stood. That came with the peaceful transition of government that occurred in 2000. Throughout the two decades of the "unofficial" relationship, the 1980s and 1990s, the fundamental understanding between the US and Taiwan, was that Taiwan should maintain a "low profile" externally to prevent tensions with China.

There were important practical reasons for this, well understood by both, and manageable by Taiwan. Manageable, that is, under an authoritarian regime but not so manageable with democratization.

Increasingly the low-profile strategy, as far back as the 1990s, began to be seen differently by many in Taiwan. It was seen as being advantageous to China, but weakening Taiwan's ability to maintain a separate existence. High profile was for the Taiwanese a logical way for Taiwan to remind the world of its legitimacy and that it existed separately from China. So it seems that the "low profile" underpinning of the US-Taiwan relationship has become simply impractical. It can't be put back into the bottle.

The PRC is given credit these days for understanding that high-profile threats, or even unfriendly statements against Taiwan, are counterproductive to their objective in making Taiwan a province of China. It took them some time to grasp this reality. But it seems unclear to Beijing's leaders even now just what should be done about their previously strong hold on what they think should be considered provocations. Now, with a robust and important but not formally recognized economic relationship with Taiwan, it is getting more difficult. Higher tensions in the cross-strait relationship would not be helpful for them either.

Taiwan seems to have learned how to use the provocation method themselves. Taiwan's democratic openness and the inevitable campaign rhetoric that goes with it gives the government a better plat-form to complain about provocative behavior from China. Perhaps even more important, it is challenging Beijing's habit of defining any changes made in Taiwan's domestic affairs as provocative and a matter of China's internal affairs.

In the present circumstances, the US leadership has placed its highest priority in East Asia on the North Korean problem, which includes working closely with China. Taiwan's leaders see the preoccupations China now has -- North Korea externally, and its domestic situation requiring almost total attention to the economy and maintaining stability during this period of rapid and widespread reform -- as an opportunity. This may not only boost the government's chances in next March's election, but allow the needed but sensitive reform in the government structure to be addressed.

In Taipei, as in Washington, important but sensitive policies are worked out by a limited number of people, and approved by the president. But in both places, the timing for revealing the policy to the public is the president's prerogative, which means that even the small number in the know are sometimes surprised. That's more manageable with domestic policies, but not so manageable if it impacts on foreign relations.

While many attribute any statements made by a candidate in an upcoming election as pure politics and nothing more, the experience of the last three years suggests that progress on almost all issues -- economic, welfare, education, corruption and cross-strait relations -- cannot move forward under the present political structure.

The need for constitutional change is clear if permanent gridlock in running the country is to be avoided. The debate is over the degree of change, and in what direction, but not that change in the constitution should not take place.

Likewise, trying to address an individual issue that is contested in the legislature, without the president, for example, having the power of veto, leaves no other choice but to find some legal means of getting around the legislative roadblock. A referendum, whatever aspects of it that can be politically motivated and sensitive with regard to cross-strait relations, does legally provide a means of doing so. The debate is doing so constructively and avoiding the sensitivities, not that there should be no referendums.

National identity is another sensitive issue in Taiwan. It is not new. It has been present in every election that has taken place since democratization, through direct elections, began. What is different is that it has become much more openly expressed. That is not going to go away. On the contrary, it will grow with every election, and likely more aggressively. The youn-ger generation, rapidly moving toward being a majority of voters and confident that they can express themselves in any way they wish, for the most part take a separate identity for granted. The lack of consensus on this issue is an albatross for any administration. It is not that it shouldn't be addressed, but in what way.

So, for Taiwan and the US, the challenge is how to avoid "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" -- that is overdoing what to try politically in light of important sensitivities on the one side, while not overreacting to legitimate reform in the democratic process on the other.

Full and unfettered democracy in Taiwan matters in many ways, for Taiwan primarily, but for the broader objectives of the US and the region. Clearly, a means for the leadership in both countries to permit more direct communications between them has become increasingly necessary.

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