Editorial: Taiwan's secret angels in the US

Taiwan's election campaign battle has spread from within the country to the US, with both President Chen Shui-bian and Lien Chan, the presidential candidates of the green and blue camps respectively, visiting the US within the past month. Votes and cash from the US are limited, but both Chen and Lien are seeking support and endorsement from "American friends" for their presidency. In this regard, Chen has performed much better pushing his "referendum and new constitution" agenda in the US than Lien did promoting his "new one China" dictum.

Three years ago, Chen was viewed as a charismatic native-born candidate who nevertheless was short on international vision and diplomatic resources. Since Chen won the 2000 election, he has visited foreign countries every year and stopped over in the US during every visit. After three years of hard work, Chen -- who has never studied abroad and does not speak English -- is performing on a par with Lien, who holds a doctorate from the University of Chicago. Chen met with a record number of US Congress members during his stopover. Many other US politicians also greeted him by phone. Chen's stopover in New York has changed his image of being short on diplomacy.

Both Lien and Chen hoped to create momentum for their campaigns via the support of "American friends" and Chinese-speaking expatriates. Both the blue and green camps are making all-out efforts to mobilize their resources and connections in the US. Lien adopted a primarily academic keynote for his US visit -- attending banquets with scholars in Boston and at Harvard, and meeting with people from think tanks such as the US-China Policy Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research and the Heritage Foundation. Meanwhile, Chen focused on political, diplomatic and human rights issues. Though not on an official visit, Chen managed to take advantage of his presidential position and received a boost from US Congress members, thus creating a media focus.

Taiwanese expatriates swarming to New York to see the president of their country also provided an absolute media advantage.

Both Lien and Chen met with American Institute in Taiwan chairwoman Therese Shaheen during their visits. While meeting with Lien in Washington, Shaheen told him that the US would stay neutral in regard to Taiwan's internal affairs. Ten days later, however, Shaheen said during the welcoming banquet for Chen in New York that US President George W. Bush was a "secret angel" of Taiwan.

Shaheen's remarks definitely had the effect of adding more political brownie points for Chen.

Chen's most important mission in his stopover was to promote his key campaign platforms -- referendums and a new constitution. US opposition to these platforms would have a deleterious effect on Chen's campaign. While in New York, Chen gave explanations and guarantees by saying that a new constitution would not violate his "five noes" pledge, that referendums are a basic right of the people, and that Taiwan's current Constitution is out of date. The prior review of Chen's speech by the US government had stirred an uproar in the Taiwanese media, but the fact that Chen was able to speak publicly about referendums and a new constitution in New York also implied a tacit agreement from Washington. Chen's New York trip was not futile.

By comparison, the platform proposed by Lien -- that "one China" means the Republic of China -- is a passive, defensive platform and also a regression to the pre-martial law era as far as cross-strait relations are concerned. Though theoretically consistent in terms of defending the ROC, it is not feasible in real life. Lien certainly received very limited applause from Taiwan, Beijing and the US for his proposal.

The Cairo Declaration is no longer relevant to Taiwan

By Chen Hurng-yu

Tuesday, Nov 04, 2003,Page 9

When the legal status of Taiwan is mentioned in our junior high school text books, the Cairo Declaration is always mentioned as being important to [the definition of] that legal status. This year, some scholars have demanded that the San Francisco Treaty of Peace with Japan, also known as the San Francisco Peace Treaty, be included in junior high school text books in order to inform students about historic changes related to Taiwan.

This is a good suggestion, although a few shortcomings remain. Although the aforementioned documents have proven their historical significance, it must be understood that, as a result of US president Harry Truman's post-war policy changes and his changed understanding of the document, the Cairo Declaration can no longer be relied upon as a document determining Taiwan's international status. That is the topic of this article.

Content and Functions of the Cairo Declaration

The allied forces arranged a meeting between ROC President Chiang Kai-shek, Truman, and UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill in the Egyptian capital Cairo between Nov. 22 and 25, 1943, to discuss the handling of a Japanese surrender. The three issued a joint declaration on Nov. 27 stating that "all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa and the Pescadores [Penghu], shall be restored to the Republic of China."

On July 26, 1945, Truman, Churchill and Chiang issued a joint "Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender," also known as the Potsdam Declaration, which stated that "The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out."

The Cairo Declaration, which illustrates the joint determination of the three states, was implemented following the end of the war. On Aug. 17, 1945, the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers issued his General Order No 1: "The senior Japanese commanders and all ground, sea, air and auxiliary forces within China (excluding Manchuria), Formosa and French Indo-China north of 16 north latitude shall surrender to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek." The ROC government followed the order, and on Oct. 25 the ROC forces accepted the Japanese surrender in Taipei and took over administrative control of the island.

Judging from the text of the order, the task of the ROC forces was to "accept surrender," not to "occupy," and even less to "occupy permanently." The situation was similar to when ROC forces went to northern Vietnam to accept the surrender of the Japanese army and when the US accepted the surrender of the Japanese forces in Japan.

This has led to differing interpretations of the question of whether the acceptance of the surrender was meant to be on behalf of the allied forces or if it was meant to become a permanent occupation.

Judging from the ROC government's behavior, the acceptance of the surrender of the Japanese forces was, naturally, the same as the return [of Taiwan to the ROC government], since the Cairo Declaration stated that Taiwan and Penghu should be returned to the ROC. Following the acceptance of the surrender, Taiwan was immediately incorporated into the ROC's administrative system and ROC rule was effectively established. At the time, other nations did not interfere with or question the way in which the ROC took administrative control of Taiwan, nor did the US declare a differing view.

It is also worth delving into the question of whether there was a qualitative difference between the acceptance by the ROC armed forces of the surrender of the Japanese forces in Taiwan and their acceptance of the Japanese surrender in northern Vietnam or the US acceptance of the Japanese surrender in Japan and South Korea. From the very outset, the ROC government declared that its [presence in northern Vietnam to effect the] acceptance of the Japanese surrender was temporary. As soon as the task was completed, they left northern Vietnam, and there was never any intent to permanently occupy the area.

The same situation applied to the acceptance by the US forces of the surrender of the Japanese forces in Japan and South Korea. Japan and South Korea set up their own governments while the US established military bases in the two countries based on military cooperation agreements.

The biggest difference between these four examples was that the ROC government had advocated the establishment of an independent Vietnam prior to the Cairo Conference. The Cairo Declaration then specified that Taiwan and Penghu be returned to the ROC and that Korea be given independence. Item 12 in the Potsdam Declaration stated that Japan should develop gradually towards democracy, and that the occupying forces should leave once a popularly elected government had been established. These differences show that there was a clear legal intent behind the Cairo Declaration when it came to the future status of Taiwan and Penghu.

However, from the point of view of legal procedure, there were flaws in the process through which the ROC came to occupy Taiwan following its acceptance of the surrender of the Japanese forces here. Because Taiwan was ceded to Japan in a treaty, the recapture of Taiwanese and Penghu territory by the ROC from Japan should also be treaty-based.

The fact that the ROC's acquisition of the Taiwan and Penghu territories was not based on a treaty made it a non-treaty-based "occupation," and not a legal "acquisition." The Japanese left Taiwan after the surrender, and did not legally "return" Taiwan and Penghu. In the legal sense, the fact that Japanese military personnel and civilians left Taiwan and Penghu does not mean that it automatically lost its right of possession over the two islands since it didn't declare that it gave up this right.

Although Japan signed the surrender document on Sept. 2, 1949, promising to accept the text of the Potsdam Declaration, ie, unconditional surrender (stipulated in item 13), it didn't mean that the Taiwan and Penghu territories, both in Japanese possession, could be automatically transferred to the ROC.

Truman's declaration

On Jan. 5, 1950, just after civil war had once again divided China into two government entities, Truman declared that "The United States Government will not pursue a course which will lead to involvement in the civil conflict in China." It is obvious that US policy continued to be one of non-interference in the Taiwan Strait conflict. However, on June 27, 1950, following the outbreak of the Korean War on June 25, Truman declared the "neutralization of Formosa."

Most importantly, in a statement on the same day, Truman said that "The determination of the future status of Formosa must await the restoration of security in the Pacific, a peace settlement with Japan, or consideration by the United Nations."

On June 28, the day following that statement, Truman sent the US' Seventh Fleet to patrol the Taiwan Strait to prevent China from attacking Taiwan, as well as to block Taiwanese forces from attacking China. The US goal was clear -- to respond with its full force to the war on the Korean peninsula it would be best if another war did not develop in the Taiwan Strait.

Truman's Far East policies were almost completely contrary to those of Franklin Roosevelt. For example, Roosevelt advocated placing Vietnam under international administration after the war and that the Chinese army should accept the surrender of the Japanese forces there.

However, when Roosevelt died towards the end of the war and Truman succeeded him, Truman completely overturned Roosevelt's Far East policy. He agreed to the British request that Vietnam be divided into a northern and a southern war theater, and that the Chinese and British armies should accept the surrender of the Japanese forces in North and South Vietnam, respectively. After the war, he also agreed to the French request that Chinese forces leave North Vietnam and that France station soldiers there. The same approach was applied to Taiwan. Roosevelt advocated the return of Taiwan to the ROC, while Truman advocated an undetermined status for Taiwan. His declaration fundamentally negated Roosevelt's position as declared in the Cairo Declaration.

Taiwan's position in the San Francisco Peace Treaty

In order to implement his new position on the issue of Taiwan's status, Truman on Sept. 14, 1950, proposed "Seven Principles for the Peace Treaty with Japan" which were to function as a guideline during peace talks with Japan. The third of these principles stated that "Japan will ... accept the future decision of the UK, the Soviet Union, China and the United States with reference to the status of Formosa, Pescadores, South Sakhalin and the Kuriles...."

At the time, the US supported the ROC government on Taiwan since it supported Taiwan's sending representatives to attend the San Francisco conference concerning the peace treaty with Japan.

The US' stance, however, was defeated, because the Soviet Union supported the attendance of the People's Republic of China in the 1951 conference. With both the US and the Soviet Union insisting on their positions, it was in the end decided that neither the ROC nor the PRC would be invited to the conference. A total of 51 countries attended the San Francisco conference, and on Sept. 8 the "Treaty of Peace With Japan" was passed and signed by 48 countries (the treaty was not signed by the Soviet Union, Poland and Czechoslovakia). Article 2, item 2, of the treaty states that "Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores." The US and the UK were among the signatories to the treaty, which was ratified by the parliaments of both countries.

The San Francisco Treaty of Peace with Japan is an international treaty signed by 48 countries and it has a high degree of binding legal force. Although the ROC did not sign this treaty, it did sign a bilateral peace treaty with Japan in 1952, a treaty which also includes the clause "Japan has renounced all right, title, and claim to Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) as well as the Spratley Islands and the Paracel Islands," which proves that the ROC also recognizes that Japan waived its rights to Taiwan and Penghu.

This shows that Truman, in the middle of the Korean War, had no intention of adhering to the statements made in the Cairo Declaration concerning Taiwan's status. The US opinion that Taiwan and Penghu belonged to the ROC changed, instead causing their international status to become ambiguous so that the US would not be infringing on Chinese territory if it in future were to send military forces to the Taiwan Strait.

In other words, the three countries signing the Cairo Declaration had by this time accepted that Japan had merely "renounced all right, title, and claim to Taiwan and Penghu." Looking at international precedent, the validity of an international treaty accepting that Japan has renounced all right, title, and claim to Taiwan and Penghu is far stronger than the opinion stated in the Cairo Declaration that Taiwan and Penghu belong to the ROC.

Finally, there is one more related issue worth mentioning -- the question of whether the Cairo Declaration is legally effective.

There has been a lot of debate concerning this issue, both from the perspective of the validity of the declaration, and from the perspective that the declaration had not been signed by the head of state of any of the three participating nations.

This debate, however, is superfluous. Due to the principles that more recent legislation takes precedence over earlier legislation, and that multilateral international agreements take precedence over declarations, the Cairo Declaration was invalidated or given secondary status by Truman's declaration and the passage of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Furthermore, the San Francisco Peace Treaty's treatment of Taiwan and Penghu had been agreed to by the ROC, the US and the UK after the end of the war.

The ROC government occupies Taiwan and Penghu territories

The San Francisco Peace Treaty treated Taiwan and Penghu as territories renounced by Japan. Juridically speaking, the Taiwan and Penghu territories were abandoned, and since it had not been specified who should take over jurisdiction, they had become no man's land. However, as explained in the foregoing, the ROC government implemented effective administrative control over Taiwan and Penghu following the war.

Did this effective administrative control come to an end when Taiwan and Penghu became no man's land? That is not possible, because the ROC government, as a sovereign entity, had de facto control over Taiwan and Penghu, and it did not administer the territories as a trustee.

De facto, the ROC's administrative control over Taiwan and Penghu should therefore remain in effect. De jure, the ROC government was the first government to take administrative control when Japan renounced its rights over the Taiwan and Penghu territories, and it did so by means of occupation.

The PRC is the only country to offer a diverging opinion concerning the ROC government's occupying and taking over the Taiwan and Penghu territories. This should be a legal conflict -- armed confrontation would be an obvious violation of the UN's guiding principle that conflict be resolved by peaceful means. It also goes against Beijing's repeated declarations that it will use peaceful means to resolve conflict.

Conclusion

In order to meet its strategic needs in the Asia-Pacific region following the outbreak of the Korean War, the US rendered Taiwan's status uncertain in order to make it a link in its effort to stop communism from spreading to the Pacific islands. Because the ROC supported such changes, it gained US support and the survival of Taiwan instead of coming under communist rule.

One major issue that cannot be ignored is the fact that post-war changes in the international situation has meant changes to the validity of the Cairo Declaration.

Finally, I must stress that as far as the US' fundamental Taiwan policy goes, Truman's declaration and the San Francisco Treaty of Peace with Japan, which he planned, to this day lie at the heart of the US' Taiwan policy.

Chen Hurng-yu is a professor of history at National Chengchi University.

Columnist still defiant after attack

VIOLENT RESPONSE: A Chinese dissident based in New York said he was attacked by pro-China supporters but that he would stick to his beliefs

By Huang Tai-lin

STAFF REPORTER

Tuesday, Nov 04, 2003,Page 1

A day after he said he was assaulted by pro-unification supporters, New York-based political commentator Cao Chang-ching said yesterday in Taiwan that he would not bow to violence and insisted on his belief that Taiwanese have the right to determine their future.

"It is shocking that an incident like this would happen in democratic Taiwan," said Cao of the assault on Sunday night.

Unhappy with Cao's pro-Taiwan-independence remarks made at an international conference on Sunday, four members of the pro-unification Patriot Association beat and orally abused Cao in the lobby of the Grand Hotel, Cao said.

Cao said that he will continue to insist on his personal freedom of speech and will never compromise in the face of violence.

"Apparently there is an underlying arrogant force in Taiwan which purposefully produces fear and uses violence against people who hold different points of view," Cao said at a press conference, accompanied by lawmakers of the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

"What happened made me feel as if we were back in the terror society in China and that [these assailants] were like the Red Guards during the Chinese Cultural Revolution," said Cao, a political commentator and columnist for the US' Radio Free Asia, Hong Kong's Open magazine and the Taipei Times.

Cao was a former deputy editor-in-chief of the Chinese communist newspaper the Shenzhen Youth News.

He was fired in 1986 -- and the newspaper was dissolved shortly afterward -- after the newspaper published an editorial saying that then Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping ought to retire.

Cao was in Taiwan this week at the invitation of the think tank Taiwan Advocates and the Northern Taiwan Society.

Cao, who will return to New York on Saturday, is slated to deliver a speech at an event tonight sponsored by the Northern Taiwan Society.

The Taiwan Advocates will work with the Northern Taiwan Society to strengthen security for Cao, according to a Cao aide who wished not to be named.

"Unless unpleasant events of a similar nature happen again, Cao is unlikely to change his schedule during his visit in Taiwan," said Cao's aide, adding that Cao had nevertheless moved to a different hotel following Sunday's incident.

The aide said that Cao is not considering suing his assailants because "Cao understands these people's stance and hopes that through advice and using a moral approach these people will come to understand that democracy started with people-to-people relations and not the use of violence."

Denying that they had attacked Cao, the four members of the Patriot Association yesterday sued Cao for making false allegations.

If true, this would not be the first time pro-unification supporters had attacked commentators who opposed their views.

In March, Chin Heng-wei, a political commentator and editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine, was attacked while he was walking home with his wife.

The assailant was believed to be angry with Chin's liberal stance on cross-strait affairs and Taiwan independence.

In May 2000, retired serviceman Shih Li-hsing poured red ink onto former president Lee Teng-hui, who, he said, had raised tensions between ethnic groups in Taiwan and betrayed the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) during his 12 years as head of the party.

Ching and Lee chose not to press charges against their attackers.

In view of these cases, Chiu Hei-yuan, a sociology professor at National Taiwan University, said: "These repeated incidents suggest that there is an undercurrent in Taiwan's democratic society."

These incidents "showed that there are a small number of people in Taiwan who have yet to learn to respect and accept democratic values; that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion," Chiu said.

"It is okay that these people are fervent about their political stance," Chiu added, "but they ought to learn not to resort to violence against people who hold different opinions from theirs."

Chiu suggested that suing the assailants was one efficient approach to prevent similar assaults from happening again.

Echoing Chiu's remarks, KMT Legislator Apollo Chen said: "One should not take a violent approach just because someone holds an opposite or different opinion."

Chen, a member of a political party that favors Taiwan's eventual unification with China, noted that the aggressive moves taken by the pro-unification group would likely backfire.

"Violent moves of this type will only end up drawing people away from sharing and wanting to accept their ideals and beliefs," Chen said.

Chen was jailed for free speech, Cabinet official says

By Ko Shu-ling

STAFF REPORTER

Tuesday, Nov 04, 2003,Page 3

"Chen was imprisoned for free speech during the martial law era."

－Lee Yi-yang, director-general of the Cabinet's Central Personnel Administration

President Chen Shui-bian was imprisoned for publishing an article which said former New Party lawmaker Elmer Feng's doctoral dissertation was a plagiarized work, a Cabinet official said yesterday.

"Chen was imprisoned for free speech during the martial law era," not for libel as charged by People First Party Chairman James Soong, said Lee Yi-yang, director-general of the Cabinet's Central Personnel Administration.

"His [Soong's] accusation was no different from denying the nation's history and democratic trailblazers' efforts to strive for freedom of speech," Lee said.

Lee made the remark yesterday afternoon in response to Soong's accusation that Chen did not deserve the award presented to him by the International League for Human Rights in the US because he was imprisoned for libel in 1986 when he was director of Formosa magazine.

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government saw to it that Chen was convicted of libel and forced him to serve an eight-month sentence.

Lee, then the editor in chief of the magazine, said that he, Chen and Huang Tien-fu, now an adviser to the president, were persecuted for publishing the article, which said that then KMT academic and former New Party lawmaker Elmer Feng's dissertation was a plagiarized work.

"An investigation conducted by seven renowned academics in the North American Taiwanese Professors' Association in 1985 concluded that Feng's dissertation was `without a doubt' a plagiarized work," Lee said, pointing to a hard copy of the investigation report.

Feng then filed a charge of libel against the magazine.

While Chen's appeal against the conviction was pending, Chen left his post as a Taipei City councilor and returned to his home county of Tainan to run for county commissioner.

Chen lost the election by just a handful of votes, but his supporters suspected vote-rigging on the part of election authorities.

Shortly after the election, Chen's wife, Wu Shu-chen was crippled when a three-wheeled truck mowed her down.

President Chen denies connection to US arms dealer

By Lin Chieh-yu

STAFF REPORTER , IN PANAMA

Tuesday, Nov 04, 2003,Page 3

President Chen Shui-bian yesterday denied connections with a US arms dealer with whom he shared a table at a human rights award dinner banquet.

Chen also denied the accusation that his receiving the 2003 International Human Rights Award was a result of strong lobbying from the US arms dealers.

Chen started his seven-day overseas trip on Friday, mainly to receive an award from the International League for Human Rights and to celebrate Panama's 100th anniversary of independence.

Chen said he only realized he had sat at the same table as president and CEO of defense contractor United Defense Thomas Rabaut after he read the newspaper. He said he did not know Rabaut or his company.

"I am most proud of the fact, one that can endure scrutiny, that since I became the Taipei mayor, everyone knows my style, that is, I do not touch or monitor any purchase cases," Chen said.

"As president I never interfere with any purchase case, whether it be with the Ministry of National Defense or other ministries."

"It is not a problem when an arms dealer sits with me because I do not deal with them," Chen said.

Chen also responded to People First Party Chairman James Soong's criticism that he did not enjoy a top-level reception from the US government due to the lack of a 21-gun salute. Chen said that anyone with common political sense knows that unless there were official diplomatic ties with the US, there would be no such salute.

Chen added that Soong's criticism was not worth rebutting.

"When we travel overseas, we only have one thing in mind: that the welfare of the people and the country is above everything. We hope our competitors do not criticize us," Chen said.

Chen said that when one was abroad one should try to promote Taiwan instead of bringing domestic quarrels overseas.

DPP looks to Control Yuan for help

ILL-GOTTEN GAINS: The DPP believes the government watchdog can put pressure on the KMT to help get a law governing improperly obtained assets passed

By Fiona Lu

STAFF REPORTER

Tuesday, Nov 04, 2003,Page 3

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is looking for help from the Control Yuan to help deal with assets improperly obtained by political parties, a DPP legislative leader said this week.

"The DPP will ask for help from external bodies, such as the Control Yuan, to pressure the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to team up with other parties to complete the statute regarding the disposition of assets improperly obtained by political parties this session," DPP Legislator Ker Chien-ming said.

"The legislation hopefully will provide a legal foundation for the disposition of assets improperly gained by the former ruling party and solve the controversy of the land occupation and wealth of the National Women's League of the ROC," a wartime foundation instituted by Soong Mayling, Ker said.

The issue of the league's occupation of government land and an estimated wealth of NT$70 billion came up with Soong's death on Oct. 23. She was chair of the KMT-affiliation organization until her passing.

The controversy surrounding the Cheng Hsin Rehabilitation Medical Center, founded by Soong for sheltering poliomyelitis patients in suburban Peitou, has also been raised.

The center was built on land belonging to the Ministry of National Defense (MND). The land is estimated to be worth NT$8 billion.

Both institutes enjoyed support from the ministry since Soong founded them in 1950 and 1962, respectively.

"The DPP is aware of the mission to resolve disputed ownership or occupation of government resources by persons or groups close to the former KMT regime. We consider the statute a priority since it would help to solve the asset debate," Ker said.

Sunshine bills

Along with the draft lobby law, the statute governing political donations, the government information disclosure bill and the political party law, the party assets disposition statute was dubbed a "political sunshine bill" by the DPP and considered a priority for this legislative session.

"At the moment, we are working to gather new evidence to challenge the legitimacy of the former ruling party and its rulers' occupation of government properties," Ker said. "The findings will be presented to Control Yuan members later to go along with member Huang Huang-hsiung's investigation into how the KMT obtained its incredible wealth and assets."

Ker's remark came up after DPP Legislator Kuo Wen-chen questioned National Defense Minister Tang Yao-ming on Tuesday over the women's league's occupation of government land.

"The foundation's gratis tenancy and preferential treatment by the government is unreasonable. .... The league's original function of fighting against communism and the USSR is definitely out of date," Kuo said.

He advised the ministry to review the preferential treatment accorded the foundation and called for an overall study of the legitimacy of the league's ownership of public donations for greeting and appreciating troops.

"Furthermore, the clear-cut political preference of league members raises concerns they might violate the rule of neutrality by using the foundation's privileged wealth and resources to campaign for certain presidential candidates next year," Kuo said.

Acknowledging the offer to the foundation was unfair, the ministry had contacted the league in August to discuss terminating the contract, Tang said.

The ministry was also working on retrieving the land from the medical center, which was turned into a general hospital in 1991.

Reprimand

The ministry was corrected by the Control Yuan in 1996 for failing to take back the occupied government lands.

"The MND shoulders the responsibility for allowing the disconnect between the real use and the written purpose of the land lease," the Control Yuan investigation concluded.

Termination of the illegitimate use of the lands by its tenants, including the National Women's League and the Cheng Hsin hospital, was imperative, Control Yuan members urged.

Commenting on the correction, Ker added, "A legal formulation to guide the handling of ill-gotten party assets would help government agencies secure the retrieval."

But KMT spokesman Alex Tsai said his party would challenge the legal changes.

"The proposed statute made two mistakes. First, according to the DPP, the KMT must prove its innocence in obtaining the properties. Second, the KMT has been presumed to be guilty of occupying its assets from the view of the proposed law," Tsai said.

Overseas pundits upbeat over Chen's election chances

By Stephanie Wen

STAFF REPORTER

Tuesday, Nov 04, 2003,Page 3

While in Taiwan the outcome of next year's presidential election seems unpredictable, pundits from outside Taiwan are optimistic that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) will win.

They agreed that DPP's proposals to pass a referendum law and create a new constitution were a boon to the party's election campaign.

At an international conference hosted by the pro-independence think tank Taiwan Advocates on the weekend, associate professor Tsukasa Shibuya at the Institute of World Studies of Takushoku University said President Chen Shui-bian could rely on a wide base of support.

"Chen is very popular in the southern counties of Taiwan and among young voters, as well as elderly who suffered during the authoritarian era," Shibuya said.

"Chen has also always had good results from his previous election campaigns. He won five out of seven times he ran in elections, and on the two occasions he lost they were close races," Shibuya

While running in an election is not a matter of luck, "the tide of history is on the side of the pan-green camp," Shibuya said.

The DPP's plans to legislate referendums and create a new constitution also give the DPP an edge, as they give the people of Taiwan "something concrete," Shibuya said. "They will help Chen win the votes of people who have no political preference, the undecided voters."

Professor Hidenori Ijiri at Tokyo University of Foreign Studies said that without these controversial proposals, the vision the DPP provides to the people of Taiwan would be "too vague."

Columnist Cao Chang-ching, formally a New-York-based Chinese dissident, said that Taiwan needed a constitution that reflects the reality of the country.

"We already know that China's reality is authoritarian. What we need to see is Taiwan's reality. The map of Taiwan is not like the shape of a its leaf," as Taiwanese students used to learn from maps in their primary-school text books that included the People's Republic of China (PRC) and Mongolia.

"Every ordinary US citizen I ask when I am in New York has told me that they think Taiwan is a country. The reality has yet to be realized by all of Taiwan's people," Cao said.

Cao urged the people of Taiwan to make use of their right to choose.

"The 1.3 billion people in China have no such right. But Taiwan should recognize that without seeing reality there would be no democratization for Taiwan," Cao said. "Former president Lee Teng-hui dares to say the reality of Taiwan -- that is why he is still supported by so many Taiwanese people. The DPP's proposal of a new constitution will be favorable to its election campaign as it speaks the voice of Taiwan."

Asked if the DPP's plans had had any adverse effects on the cross-strait situation, Ijiri said China was unlikely to make any move.

"Their tactic is to wait and see. After the election, if they want to take any action, they still have time," Ijiri said.

Chen excited about Powell meet

OVERSEAS TRIP: Calling the US `Taiwan's best friend,' Chen said he is looking forward to meeting the US secretary of state while in Panama

By Lin Chieh-yu

STAFF REPORTER , IN PANAMA, WITH CNA

Tuesday, Nov 04, 2003,Page 3

President Chen Shui-bian said on Sunday he was looking forward to talking with US Secretary of State Colin Powell during his visit to Panama to attend the Central American country's centenary celebrations.

Chen made the remarks during a tea party with a group of Taiwanese reporters covering his overseas tour. He arrived in Panama earlier in the day after a two-day stop in New York.

Powell will head a delegation to attend Panama's centennial on behalf of US President George W. Bush, and Chen said he hopes to have courtesy chats with Powell and high-ranking officials of other countries.

Chen said "the US is Taiwan's best friend," and thanked the US for its reception for him in New York. He also indicated his wish to visit Washington in the future.

Chen visited historical ruins in Panama.

He said that he was very satisfied with his visit to New York.

"There were many breakthroughs in diplomatic activities when we made the transit stop in New York. These activities were consented by the US government in advance. We did not engage in these activities ad lib or try to use these activities to detect the US' bottom line," Chen said.

Chen said that the American Institute in Taiwan was consulted before any activities. He said it was not an accident that he talked to the media after paying tribute to Soong Mayling.

"The US-Taiwan relationship is based on mutual respect and trust, and most important of all, we should not do anything rash," Chen said.

When reporters asked whether Chen would try to visit Washington, he said that he had many expectations for the future, but that these things cannot be rushed. He said Taiwan could not take only its interests into consideration, but had to think of others as well.

"Taiwan and the US do not have official diplomatic ties. Therefore, there are no so-called rights or obligations," Chen said. "Many dreams cannot be realized at one go. But as long as we do not give up the dream but persist and believe in ourselves, one day we shall succeed."

Despite flying for more than 20 hours and participating in various functions, Chen said that he was not tired. However, due to a lack of sleep, Chen has grown a pimple on the front of his nose.

After arriving in Panama, Chen and his entourage changed into traditional Panamanian shirts.

Regarding the future of the US-Taiwan relationship, Chen said that mutual trust was the most important thing. Chen also warned that this trust could be destroyed completely overnight.

He said that, while Taiwan has had a difficult time, it should tolerate and keep silent on certain things to pursue the common interests for both countries.

"International society has been very unfair to Taiwan. But it is exactly because we have put up with so many discriminating issues in the past that we earned the courteous treatment when making the transit stop in New York. We have to cherish this achievement," he said.

Chen also praised Taiwan's representative to the US, Chen Chien-jen. President Chen said the success of the transit stop should be attributed to the efforts of those who played the role of "green leaves," adding that Chen Chien-jen was one of those green leaves.

President Chen also expressed his sympathy for Chen Chien-jen's wife, Yolanda Ho. A few days ago, Ho tried to send Lien Fang Yu, the wife of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan, flowers when Lien was visiting Washington, but Lien declined the flowers.

"It was not very nice. The flowers should have been accepted as a courtesy. Therefore I would like to show my sympathy for Mrs. Chen, and I hope Chen would give his wife my sympathy for me and tell her not to mind," Chen Shui-bian said.

US sovereignty a model for Taiwan

By Paul Lin

Tuesday, Nov 04, 2003,Page 8

Thousands of Taiwanese people recently took to the streets to push for changing the nation's name, carrying out referendums and establishing a new constitution. This clearly shows that Taiwan's democratic movement is about to move into a new stage.

The Republic of China (ROC) entered a new era when it relocated to Taiwan and the People's Republic of China (PRC) was officially established in 1949. Even as then president Chiang Kai-shek vowed to retake China in an effort to maintain people's morale, he knew in his heart that it was a mission impossible -- although most people did not sense it at that time. He even said during a speech in March 1950 that "our ROC already fell into the enemy's hands last year, and has `almost' become extinct." The only thing left over the past half century has been the "ROC on Taiwan."

Taiwan created not only an economic miracle but also a miracle of democratic politics during this period. However, unlike the nation's economic and political miracles, its diplomatic work has been repeatedly frustrated because of China's merciless suppression. Taiwan must embrace the world resolutely so as to gain dignity that matches its economic and political achievements in the international community. Unfortunately, Beijing is using some Taiwanese politicians' unification sentiment to hold back Taiwan, and constantly intimidates the nation by pen and sword. This damages the nation's economy and politics, and its chance to walk its own way. As a result, unifying people's understanding and actions through the establishment of a new constitution that matches reality has become an increasingly urgent task.

The Anglo-Saxons, along with other ethnic groups, broke away from British rule and arrived in America, becoming a new immigrant country by founding the United States of America. This is exactly what Taiwan should do. Today's China is just like Britain in the past, and tomorrow's Taiwan will be just like today's US. If China claims that Taiwan has always been a part of its territory, then perhaps Britain can also claim that North America has always been a part of its territory.

Most ancestors of the Taiwanese people were immigrants from China, just like most ancestors of the American people were immigrants from Britain. The US was able to declare independence and create a new constitution. Why can't Taiwan do so? The US inherited British culture and developed its own one. Taiwan inherited Chinese culture and is also able to develop a culture of its own. The minor differences between Mandarin spoken in Taiwan and Putonghua -- the most commonly spoken language of China -- are just like the minor differences between today's American and British English.

The British people relocated to North America threw away the historical baggage of Britain and marched forward, becoming more advanced and open. The historical baggage of China is heavier, and is not easy for Taiwan to get rid of. But once the nation gets rid of the heavy burden, it's expected to become an advanced country with an even higher quality of people. At least, Taiwan's democratic politics have surpassed the situation in China.

The US did not copy the British constitution when it was established. In the future, Taiwan does not have to follow the ROC Constitution either. Of course, it can choose to keep and glorify the good parts. It's difficult to make a constitution, especially an all-round constitution similar to that of the US. Fortunately, the Taiwanese people have discovered more and more problems since the power transition in 2000, and learnt better about where to start -- so as to promote the beneficial and abolish the harmful. At a time when the nation is striving to boost the economy, it should also strive to make a new constitution that can be accepted by the Taiwanese people.

From Christopher Columbus' discovery of America in 1492 to the 13 colonies' declaration of independence in 1776, this process actually contained many adventurous factors. Today, human beings have become much more civilized. What Taiwan is doing is in fact a great experiment. The US fought the War of Independence in order to break away from British rule. The ROC also underwent bloody battles with the PRC in the past. Since the "ROC on Taiwan" has remained independent in these years, it's hoped that an independence war that is beneficial to no one can therefore be avoided.

Nevertheless, Britain was a democratic country when the US declared independence. But China is still under authoritarian rule and is unwilling to reform to this day. Plus, the wide power gap and the narrow geographical distance between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have made it tougher and riskier for Taiwan to walk the US path. It needs more help from the international community, especially from the US, and it also hopes to gain the support and understanding of insightful people in China.

Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.