Chen sold out Taiwan? What a joke

By Chen Sung-shan

As next year's presidential election draws near, the gap between support ratings for President Chen Shui-bian and those for the Lien-Soong ticket -- Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong -- is gradually narrowing.

While the president was visiting the US and Panama, the KMT legislative caucus on Nov. 4 condemned his visit to China in 1991 when he was a legislator, questioning whether he saw any Chinese leaders, made any promises or colluded with the Chinese communists to sell out Taiwan. Some even said he should be ashamed for taking a photo with a Chinese tank at a military museum in Beijing, and that he was much inferior to the man who tried to stop a long line of tanks during the notorious 1989 Tiananmen Square Incident.

In fact, the KMT legislative caucus' campaign trick was an ignorant method that exposed its own weakness by contrasting Chen's, Lien's and Soong's personal experiences in dealing with China. Chen did visit China during his term as a legislator. During his trip, he met Tang Shubei, then vice chairman of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait, Zhang Kehui, the honorary president of the All-China Federation of Taiwan Compatriots, some military officials as well as officials from China's United Front Work Department. Apart from exchanging opinions with those officials on various cross-strait issues, military research and development and Taiwan's entry to the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), he also visited the Great Wall, the military museum and other scenic spots.

Given the cross-strait political environment at that time, it was indeed a breakthrough for Chen -- a pro-Taiwan independence legislator from Taiwan's biggest opposition party -- to visit China. Not only did he let the officials for Taiwan affairs understand the nation's political development and the voice of the Taiwanese people, he also gained a better understanding of Beijing's political hegemony and its negotiation mode.

Thanks to such past experience, Chen has always made the development of cross-strait relations, national defense, military research and Taiwan's future status his main focus throughout his political career. As a result, he proposed the "four ifs," "de facto sovereignty," the referendum platform and the Resolution on Taiwan's Future one after another inside the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). This laid a foundation for his dominance of the DPP's China policy.

Besides, he advanced with the times by proposing various cross-strait policies -- such as a basic cross-strait treaty, the "five noes," the cross-strait integration dictum, the relaxation of the "no haste, be patient" policy and the policy of "active opening, effective management." He also proposed to push for a new constitution through a referendum not long ago. These proposals allow Taiwan to rationally and practically face China's threat of swallowing up the nation and building Taiwan into a new democratic and free society and country.

This shows that Chen knows Beijing much better than Lien or Soong. His valuable visit to China made him understand how to handle complicated cross-strait issues, as well as how to deal with Chinese leaders appropriately. This is where Lien and Soong are inferior to Chen. Today, the KMT has tried to attack Chen using his own campaign tactic of calling rivals "pro-China," and using his past visit to smear him. In fact, this action only further exposed their ignorant and absurd attitude. How can the Taiwanese people trust them for correctly handling cross-strait affairs?

The KMT legislative caucus' mistaken campaign strategy will not make the Taiwanese people believe that Chen was selling out Taiwan during his visit to China. On the contrary, it will make us think that this is a reflection of the Lien-Soong camp's lack of confidence -- as the Chinese saying goes, "There is no 300 taels of silver buried here", meaning a clumsy denial only resulting in self-exposure. Since the blue camp has always been unable to rid itself of the "pro-communist" or "pro-China" labels, it has started to use Chen's visit as a basis for political mudslinging. Nevertheless, their actions may have the opposite effect, and can hardly convince others.

As a legislative assistant at that time, I was fortunate to visit China with Chen in 1991. I still remember that he wrote down "Taiwan" in the column of nationality on the customs form when entering China through the Beijing International Airport. At first, those Chinese customs officials did not know whether they should request him to correct "Taiwan" to "China" or directly prohibit his entry. But he was allowed to enter China eventually thanks to the Chinese government's courteous reception.

Chen was neither too humble nor haughty in his dealings with China. He demonstrated the determination of the Taiwanese people and maintained our dignity. Saying that Chen was selling out Taiwan during his visit to China is perhaps the biggest joke of all.

Chen Sung-shan is a member of the Cabinet's Civil Service Protection and Training Commission.

Put leash on political organizations

By Ku Chung-hwa

Several secrets have come to light amid the tumultuous debate about the historical merits and demerits of Soong Mayling following her recent death. Among those secrets are the NT$70 billion in assets allegedly owned by the National Women's League of the ROC, which was chaired by Soong for a long time. Its entire lack of financial transparency, however, has given rise to concern.

According to a Nov. 2 report in the Liberty Times, the Ministry of the Interior's civil affairs department, which is in charge of such matters, explained that the league was registered as a "political organization" under the Civic Organizations Law and that the budgets of political organizations are excluded from government supervision required by Article 33 and Article 34 of the law. Except for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), none of Taiwan's 30-plus political organizations and 102 political parties submit their budgets, final accounts and balance sheets to the authorities for review.

This situation is unthinkable in a country under the rule of law.

In contrast, social and professional organizations established under the Civic Organizations Law have their freedom of association restricted by the authorities by way of an "approval system."

The authorities have also compiled nit-picking rules covering everything from names, charters, agendas, elections and recalls, to the handling of financial matters. They sit high up in the air and instruct people on how to manage the internal affairs of an organization.

Political organizations and political parties, however, are only required to send some documents to the authorities for review. Besides, once established, they apparently do not need to undergo any supervision. It is no wonder that a "Fumin Party"  resembling a Ponzi scheme has popped up recently. Unless the Ministry of Finance cracks down hard on them, the Civic Organizations Law will become a haven for dirty business, allowing "political" organizations to commit all sorts of crimes.

With this unreasonable situation repeatedly coming under criticism, the interior ministry has recently submitted amendments to the Civic Organization Law to the Executive Yuan. The amended law would no longer divide organizations into three categories -- social, professional and political -- but would treat all organizations equally in terms of financial supervision. We can say that this is a direction in accord with the trend of democracy, but it may stir controversy between the ruling and opposition parties. Especially when it comes to regulations on political parties, the Executive Yuan needs to make up its mind on whether to enact a separate "political parties law." Otherwise, its attempts to resolve the matter will further entangle it, and will not necessarily resolve the chaotic situation of political organizations possessing numerous privileges.

However, before the law is amended or new ones enacted, we call on the so-called political organizations and political parties to accept public scrutiny instead of continuing to hide behind the shield of privileges.

They should know that Article 44 of the Civic Organizations Law stipulates, "Political organizations are organizations established by citizens of the Republic of China on the basis of shared democratic political concepts and with the objectives of helping shape political awareness among the citizens and promoting political participation by citizens." Article 45 adds that "the objective of recommending candidates to participate in elections for government office" is a key factor in the establishment of political parties.

Since the objectives are so lofty, most of these political organizations and political parties must have been established by clean and upstanding people. Then why don't they voluntarily disclose their expenditures and financial information to win public credibility?

Ever since martial law was lifted in Taiwan, the public has been discovering by the day that there were too many privileged nooks and crannies with hidden contrivances during the authoritarian era. An important function of democratization is to shed light on these corners. Supervision can no longer be fobbed off with the contention that "it has always been like this." What is more unfortunate is that it is human nature to love privilege. Therefore, organizations that are particularly close to power -- such as political organizations and political parties -- are frequently unwilling to let the sun shine on them. They would rather defend darkness and privileges.

In light of the women's league incident, the executive, legislative and judicial branches should quickly come up with more appropriate measures to regulate political organizations and political parties while easing the restrictions on social and professional organizations. They should also introduce autonomous power into civic non-governmental organizations and promote "social sunshine laws" so that the distribution of social resources may be more compatible with fairness and justice.

Ku Chung-hwa is a professor of sociology at National Chengchi University and an executive committee member of the Taipei Society.

Time to come clean, Mr. Soong

Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Chang Ching-fang has come under attack in recent days for accusing People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong of having an affair. Legislators from both the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the PFP launched a vigorous offensive against Chang and demanded that he back up his accusation with evidence. For two days, the legislature descended into chaos and the work of reviewing bills was put aside.

Taiwanese ought not be fooled by the double standards of KMT and PFP legislators, who are trying to divert attention from concern over Soong's integrity. On Sunday, Soong accused President Chen Shui-bian of giving US$1 million to the family of US President George W. Bush as a payoff for the high-level contacts he made during his recent stopover in New York.

We would ask Soong: where is your evidence of this bribe? Will you provide it? When?

Taiwanese still remember an accusation made by former New Party legislator Elmer Fung, who said former first lady Tseng Wen-hui "attempted to flee" to the US and take US$85 million with her. Fung's claims were proven to be garbage. Does Soong want to be in the same dismal category as Fung? Soong and his PFP colleagues should follow the standards they set for others and provide evidence of the US$1 million that Chen allegedly paid to the Bush family.

Soong's accusation is troubling because, as Presidential Office Secretary-General Chiou I-jen and presidential aide James Huang pointed out, Soong's remarks could have serious international consequences for Taiwan. As is common knowledge, the strength of Taiwan-US relations has long been one of the reasons why Taiwan has been able to resist China's military threat. Taiwan's government and people should take a dim view of any action that damages US-Taiwan relations, whether unwittingly or deliberately. Because Taiwan-US relations are inseparable from the issue of Taiwan's survival, they are far more important than the reputations of Soong and his secretary Yang Yun-tai. Therefore, there is an urgent need for the people of Taiwan to learn the truth about any attempt to humiliate the first family of the US. No personal scandal can compare with this.

If KMT and PFP legislators really love Taiwan more than they do power, they should demand Soong produce evidence of the payoff. The recent theatrics of KMT and PFP lawmakers were merely the same tired attempts to divert media and public attention.

Soong has denounced the VCD entitled Special Report which lampooned him as "low-class," and announced it to be an act of campaign muckraking by President Chen. We hope that Soong will disclose whatever evidence he has to back up this and every other one of his accusations so that the public might have the opportunity to bring the president to task if he was involved in any such wrongdoing.

If not, then the only reasonable deduction that could be made is that Soong is a liar, and that his cycle of lies may cost him dearly in next year's election.

Pro-China forces show dictatorial instincts

Southern Taiwan Society

The founding aims of the Southern Taiwan Society are threefold.

One, to protect Taiwanese values and dignity, and to concentrate the rising power of the people in southern Taiwan.

Two, to formulate educational, cultural and environmental policies focusing on Taiwan.

Three, to initiate a movement to reform Taiwanese society by stimulating joint public efforts.

The producers of Special Reports say they are worried over the collusion between Taiwan's unificationist politicians and media and the trouble they are creating. That is why they produced the Special Reports series. We believe their motives coincide with the aims of the Southern Taiwan Society.

Based on these aims and the protection of freedom of expression, we have helped promote this film. We have distributed about 7,000 copies, but due to being understaffed, we have had to end our promotional efforts.

We wish to state that we had nothing to do with the production of these 7,000 disks. We merely support the film based on our aim of protecting the people's freedom of expression.

Taiwan's democracy and freedom are the precious results of many individuals' decades-long sacrifices and struggle. They are the accomplishments of the Taiwanese people, although China-friendly politicians now spread lies and create social disturbances in the name of free speech. China-friendly media have also turned into a source of social disorder. This free speech chaos has existed for the past three years. Had we been in dictatorial China, these media would have been closed down.

Regrettably, People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong and PFP Legislator Chiu Yi obviously do not understand the true meaning and value of free speech. Even worse, they have joined the China-friendly media in slandering the Southern Taiwan Society, the Democratic Progressive Party and the Taiwanese Media Revolution Workshop, the producers of the Special Reports.

During the latest round of mayoral elections, the United Daily News flew the banner of press freedom in an editorial entitled "Does the investigation stop at Frank Hsieh's doorstep?" And when the offices of the China Times Express were searched by Taipei prosecutors three years ago, China Times also praised press freedom, while Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou commented on the prosecutors' search by saying "How can this be? This is really surprising .... Not that a newspaper's offices cannot be searched, but it must not be done without due consideration. They must first have concrete evidence, because this is really serious business that may have serious consequences."

It is a pity that when the common man is practicing his right to freedom of expression, he is slandered and called a muckraker or a degenerate. The media chaos repeatedly highlights the need to improve the nation's media.

That is why we solemnly call on Soong to shed the dictatorial mind-set from his time as director of the Government Information Office and governor of Taiwan Province. The China-friendly media should also abandon the mind-set that makes them despise and uglify Taiwan, while Ma should practice what he preaches and uphold the right to free speech instead of persecuting those practicing that right, as was done during the White Terror era.

We restate our absolute support for Special Reports. We will not retreat before China-friendly individuals resorting to White Terror tactics in the name of democracy.

Finally, we repeat our call for all people with a contempt for dictatorship and a passion for freedom to join us in our fight to build a free, democratic and egalitarian new Taiwanese nation.