Bush and Hu's visits to Australia

By Sushil Seth

The recent simultaneous visits of US President George W. Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao created considerable hype in Australia. Undoubt-edly, these were important visits. But they were part of the Asia-wide round-up after the Bangkok APEC summit. It was, nevertheless, projected by Canberra as some sort of Houdini-like achieve-ment to have the leaders of the world's most powerful and most populated country visiting Aus-tralia at the same time. It created a parity of sorts between the US and China; the latter billed as the rising superpower of the 21st century.

Now that the hype is over, it is possible to make a dispassionate analysis of the two visits.

The first thing to note is that US is Australia's security ally. Canberra's commitment to the US is unequivocal.

However, Sino-US relations are chugging along, with international terrorism overriding all other US concerns. Beijing is quietly expanding its political and economic space with a benign international profile. Its charm offensive has also captivated Canberra, further reinforced by the lure of a seemingly limitless market in China for its gas and other raw materials. During Hu's visit, another large contract for the supply of gas from Australia over many years was announced.

There is a sense in Australia that China's growing interest is driven by economic imperatives of ensuring supplies of essential raw materials for its rapid growth. Therefore, it is a relationship based on mutual self-interest.

According to Geoff Kitney, a prominent Sydney Morning Herald commentator, "With its economy ever hungrier for the raw materials needed to feed its rapid expansion, China has focused on Australia's potential as a supplier. Desperately needing to reduce its dependence on Middle East oil for its energy supplies, China has come to Australia for natural gas and has negotiated deals on an unprecedented scale. The experts predict similar demand for other raw materials."

At a political level, Canberra sees an advantage in cultivating ties with China to neutralize its image in Asia as the US "sheriff." Its growing relationship with China tends to validate its Asian credentials. There is quiet confidence in Canberra that it can simultaneously develop and manage its relations with Washington and Beijing.

It is not that Canberra is unaware of the pitfalls. Take the case of Taiwan, for instance. In his address, Hu made his pitch on Taiwan: "A peaceful solution to the Taiwan question serves the inter-ests of all Chinese people, including our compatriots in Taiwan."

He added, "It also serves the common interests of all countries, including Australia. The greatest threat to peace in the Taiwan Strait is from the splittist activities by the Taiwan independence forces. The Chinese Government and people look to Australia for a constructive role in China's peaceful reunification."

In other words, Beijing would expect Canberra to play a bridging role of sorts with the US.

This seems unlikely because its US ally takes for granted Austra-lia's support for its position on Taiwan. Bush told Australia's parliament that his country expected Australia to support its Taiwan policy of defending its right to separate existence.

According to Prime Minister John Howard, Australia remains committed to a "one China" policy, including peaceful reunification with Taiwan. Elaborating on this, he said, "Against that background, we would want to see a spirit of calm and peaceful dialogue pervade the whole area and that applies to the attitude of China, the attitude of Taiwan and the attitude of the United States."

And he felt "confident that with that approach this matter can, over time, be resolved in a commonsense and peaceful process." In other words, it is a case of pious hope over reality.

The reality is that China is committed to unifying with Taiwan, by force if necessary. At the same time, the US is commit-ted to prevent unification by force. As its ally, US counts on Australia for support. Beijing, on the other hand, hopes to subvert/neutralize this from Australia's increasing economic stakes with China.

China is already Australia's fourth largest and fastest growing export market, estimated at about A$18 billion (US$12.7 billion) a year. Hu told the Australian parliament that the scope for economic ties between the two countries was immense.

How will Canberra manage this difficult task of reconciling its growing economic stakes with China and security alliance with the US? The hope is that Canberra might not have to make this choice, at least not for quite a while.

Beijing doesn't seem to be queering the pitch on Taiwan. It is hoping, and Canberra appears to share this hope, that its relationship with Taiwan will be resolved through greater economic integration across the Taiwan Strait. Taiwan will eventually be sucked into China's economic whirlwind.

North Korea is another flashpoint. Here again the hope is that Beijing shares US and Australian concerns on Pyongyang's nuclear threat and will play a constructive role to contain, manage and resolve the crisis.

It might seem like a wish list, but much rides on how Beijing will act both on Taiwan and North Korea.

In other words, as long as Sino-US relations are manageable, Australia will be fine with its simultaneous political equation with China and the US.

But there is an underlying strategic rivalry between the US and China. The US focus on terrorism and the need for Chinese cooperation might have pushed this to one side, but China remains its "strategic competi-tor." To this end, the US is determined not to let any other rival power threaten it militarily. This suggests there are problems ahead in the medium and long term.

For instance, the US is going ahead with its missile defense plan, which includes Japan and Australia as regional nodal points. China regards this as directed against it. Australia is also increasingly being integrated into US strategic planning, including some of its major defense purchases from the US. It hosts American facilities, and there is talk of even greater access for US forces in Australian territory.

Against such overriding security imperatives, Canberra might not have much choice but to side with the US in any high-stakes power game.

Sushil Seth is a freelance writer based in Sydney.

Legislators' fisticuffs a disgrace

There was another fistfight in the Legislative Yuan Thursday, disgracing the nation's highest legislative body. The violence once again became hot news in the international media. Such uncivilized, undemocratic and irrational performances have made Taiwan's democracy regress.

No matter what the provocation, physical fights between lawmakers are unacceptable. In the past, the legitimacy of the legislative body was questionable -- the majority of the lawmakers did not represent the will of the people of Taiwan. This meant that irregular approaches were required to highlight the problem, and although resorting to physical abuse is wrong, it was excusable. Although the Taiwanese people and international media condemned the violence, they could understand the motives behind it.

But times have changed. Thursday's fight was basically an extension of the conflict between the blue and green camps. The blue camp wanted to pressure the judicial agencies regarding the National Security Bureau's secret funds in order to embarrass both President Chen Shui-bian and former president Lee Tung-hui. But some People First Party legislators went too far and their scuffle with Democratic Progressive Party legislators developed into an open fight and a disaster.

The legislature should severely discipline all those involved in the fight. The public should not be left thinking that the legislature's self-discipline is inferior to that of the Taoyuan County Council, which recently suspended two councilors involved in a physical altercation.

As the next presidential election draws near, it's getting more and more difficult to maintain the calm in the legislature because lawmakers from both camps see the Legislative Yuan as the best arena for political competition. Legislative immunity has made the legislature a center for rumor-mongering as lawmakers attack their rivals with ridiculous accusations. The review of the Executive Yuan's budget for the next fiscal year has been delayed, showing that half the functions of the legislative branch have been paralyzed.

The semi-paralysis of the legislature is the greatest source of political turmoil in the nation. That is why the legislature should call a recess after passing the budget and allow lawmakers to concentrate fulltime on campaigning. The next legislative session, which is scheduled to begin in February, should be postponed until after the presidential election. Otherwise campaign pressures will lead to similar political and physical confrontations in the legislature. Nothing will be accomplished, and that would be a further insult to the public.

The people are dissatisfied with the legislature. Although the government is planning reforms, including smaller electoral districts, a single-ballot system and halving the number of seats, these measures keep being postponed because of the maneuvering of vested interests. The implementation of such reforms will be more or less impossible if we have to rely on the legislature itself to pass these measures. Another way must be found to break through this deadlock. The recent physical confrontations highlight both the deficiencies in many legislators and the need for legislative reform as soon as possible.

The government wants to hold a referendum concurrent with the presidential election in March. The question of overhauling the legislature should be included in that referendum. Since our representatives are incapable of resolving the reform issue themselves, giving the people a chance to directly voice their opinions would provide a huge boost to the reform movement.

Journey to democracy focus of the world stage

By Joseph Wu

`What more could Taiwan ask for in any presidential trip to the US?'

President Chen Shui-bian returned home from a trip to Panama and the US with many accomplishments. Some have hailed the trip as a landmark in Taiwan-US relations since the ties between the two were severed in 1979. Indeed it was.

Taiwan embarked upon a historical journey toward democracy in 1980s. Even though many Tai-wanese are still unsatisfied with the system and would like to refine it so that the democracy can be consolidated, the achievements in recent years have already been remarkable.

The 2003 Human Rights Award given to Chen by the International League of Human Rights is a high-profile recognition of the nation's effort to place itself on the same standard as advanced democracies in the area of human-rights protection. This award represents the pride of this small country that strives to be recognized by the international community for its efforts.

The award ceremony in New York City, the home of the UN and the center stage for world politics, was spectacular. To make the award even more meaningful, the US Congress welcomed Chen's stopover in the US with a resolution, 416-0 in a roll-call vote. As stated by two senior congress-men, this kind of consensus was truly rare on Capital Hill, because the representatives strongly believed that Taiwan deserved the recognition.

Many participants at the ceremony, as well as those who were watching TV at home, were moved when the congressmen congratulated Taiwan and its leader, prompting cheers and tears. It was no less spectacular that the audience in New York and the folks at home in Taiwan could share the emotion simultaneously through the televised broadcast. Major international media were also present, putting Taiwan and its leader in the spotlight. International media also followed the delegation throughout the trip.

The "no publicity" rule because of the private nature of the transit visit was rendered obsolete. That made the people quite happy because they knew that Taipei's relations with the US were not the price to pay for the warming relations between the US and China.

It was unbelievable to learn on the airplane that Alaska Governor Frank Murkowski was ready to hold a red-carpet reception right at the airport together with the chair-person of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and the key officials in the great glacier state. Such unprecedented reception by the governor was so overwhelming that it warmed the freezing air. What more could Taiwan ask for in any presidential trip to the US?

In every event that was described by the local media as a "breakthrough," the AIT chairperson, the representative of the US government dealing with Taiwan, was there with Chen. It signified the US endorsement of the public and private activities of Chen while in New York and Alaska.

We were told, again and again, that the US was pleased with the stopovers, and delighted that Chen was able to receive the rights award in New York. Apparently, the US government was delighted to see that its policy of promoting human rights and democracy was bearing fruit in Taiwan.

I am certain that the majority of the people in Taiwan share my feelings that the US government is taking the right approach in its relations with Taiwan. Heart-felt appreciation is not enough to express the gratitude of the government and people.

Joseph Wu is the deputy secretary-general to the president.