Taiwan `cannot avoid' Chinese decision, experts say

BULKING UP: Former AIT head Richard Bush said that Taiwan must strengthen its position before it makes a decision on how to tackle important cross-strait issues

By Melody Chen

STAFF REPORTER

Monday, Nov 17, 2003,Page 3

"The issue is what choice best fits the interests of the people of this island. A subsidiary choice is whether to choose from a position of strength or weakness."

－Richard Bush, former chairman of the AIT

The quality of Taiwan's democracy will affect its relations with China in the long term and Taiwan's struggle over its national identity has partly contributed to the country's security dilemma, academics and political analysts said at an international conference in Taipei last week.

Richard Bush, former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and now director of the Brookings Institution's Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies, shared his views on democracy and cross-strait relations at the conference.

"Taiwan cannot avoid a choice concerning China," Bush said, explaining that the basic choice is between accommodating or resisting Chinese power, although Taiwan could decide to accommodate China economically but resist it politically.

"But to not make a choice is a choice. The issue is what choice best fits the interests of the people of this island. A subsidiary choice is whether to choose from a position of strength or weakness," Bush said.

A specialist on the subject of China's and Taiwan's political and security issues and having served almost five years as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan, which is based in Washington, Bush said Taiwan must strengthen itself if it is to make good choices.

This involves economic, military, diplomatic and psychological fortification, as well as clarifying the nation's legal identity, in order to gain a stronger negotiating position with China, Bush said.

He pointed out that Taiwan could face problems involving resource allocation when trying to strengthen its military forces.

As far as the issue of Taiwan's sovereignty is concerned, Bush said the pertinent question to ask is: "What aspects of sovereignty are important to preserve, and why?"

"The most important field of self-strengthening concerns Taiwan's democratic political system," he said.

Bush said he used to be worried that the nation's political system would not adequately reflect the people's will if a bad deal is made with Beijing. "My new fear is that the political system would not be able to accept a good deal [with Beijing]."

According to Bush, weaknesses in Taiwan's political system stem from five main aspects: the electoral system, the effects of earlier authoritarianism, problems concerning government structure, problems in the legislature and the role of the media.

The Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) early authoritarian reign in the country has resulted in the now ruling Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) insufficient pool of leaders, he said.

The "fundamentalist" faction of the DPP did not give President Chen Shui-bian enough support, and the KMT has had a hard time adjusting to being out of power, Bush said, describing these problems as the fruits of authoritarianism.

Chu Yun-han, professor of political science at National Taiwan University, who also attended the conference, said increasing support for Taiwanese independence and a declining identification with China among Taiwanese has frightened Beijing's leaders.

After studying the causes of the burgeoning Taiwanese identity during the country's democratization process, Chu concluded that a national identity is not inborn.

National identity stems from "socially and politically constructed sentiments that are subject to change and manipulation, especially under intensive mobilization of political elites at times of regime transition," Chu said.

VCD reveals public's discontent

By Fiona Lu

STAFF REPORTER

Monday, Nov 17, 2003,Page 3

A recent VCD lampooning pan-blue officials was a reflection of the public's distaste for the legislative abuse of freedom of speech, a lawmaker has said.

"The brisk sales of Special Report, which makes fun of politicians, including a number of lawmakers, is a warning to legislators to be more responsible and cautious when commenting under the protection of legislative immunity," said Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Cheng Kuo-chung.

On Friday, People First Party (PFP) Legislator Chiu Yi said that the people behind the controversial VCD -- actress Chiang Hsia, cartoonist Yu-fu, a professor surnamed Hsieh at Soochow University and political commentator Wu Chin-fa made the film to boost the DPP's election campaign.

Chiu claimed that the four DPP supporters were driven to shoot the political comedy out of a desire to keep the pan greens in office.

Chiu said he possessed evidence that proved the four plotted to attack pan-blue parties to help the DPP win next year's presidential election.

The lawmaker, however, did not present his evidence.

Cheng said, "Some lawmakers obviously go beyond their legislative immunity when they make accusations without proof in an effort to smear other people's reputation. This has caused the Legislative Yuan to be perceived by the public as a source of social chaos."

Acknowledging that he watched the VCD, Cheng said that there was nothing illegal about its content.

"I believe that people watch the VCD not only out of curiosity, but out of a feeling that the alternative film reflects their view on certain politicians. They realize that they would never get a chance to see similar interpretations in the local media because of the abnormality of domestic politics and the overstated press freedom upheld by media workers," Cheng said.

The team behind Special Report lampooned the pan-blues in a number of ways, including parodying the numerous call-in programs and news-commentary shows on television, said Cheng, who hosts a radio show in Tainan.

"Its a bizarre thing when pan-blue politicians feel they have to censure the performers when they themselves attack their political rivals on TV shows with no moral hesitation or legal restrictions," Cheng said.

Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) whip Lo Chih-ming, a frequent guest on call-in shows, agreed with Cheng, adding that the political bias of hosts made a mockery of TV debate.

"TSU members rarely participate in news programs hosted by Sisy Chen or Clara Chou because we have noticed that these two people clearly show their partiality to topics against President Chen Shui-bian and former president Lee Teng-hui," Lo said.

Lo added that because the topic was biased, it was therefore no surprise to see the hosts siding with pan-blue guests.

Lo also said that pan-blue lawmakers held double standards when it came to commenting on their political rivals and party colleagues.

"The PFP's policy research center director Chang Hsien-yao, for instance, always goes on the attack when he knows he can't win a debate," Lo said. "He says he will sue other guests or demands an instant apology from people arguing against him or his party without tangible evidence."

The TSU whip said that it was ironic that Chang's colleague Chiu was now the one making accusations without concrete evidence.

Lo also challenged his independent colleague Sisy Chen's use of legislative privileges on her TV show.

"Chen capitalizes on her legislative power to collect confidential information and materials only offered to lawmakers and brings them on to her show," he said.

Lo said that it was regrettable that she abandoned her legislative duty to supervise administrative officials at the Legislative Yuan and instead improperly took on a commercial TV program.

Cheng Cheng-iok, chief executive of the Southern Taiwan Society, said that the media had failed to fulfill their duty to distinguish right from wrong and truth from falsehood since the DPP won the 2000 presidential election.

According to Cheng Cheng-iok, many in the media were far from impartial.

"Reporters have come in line with pro-unification politicians and have ignored the fact that these people are still trying to denigrate Taiwan on behalf of China.

"Consequently, they have wide coverage of opposition legislators Diane Lee and Hung Hsiu-chu's challenge against the education ministry's proposed addition of Taiwanese history in senior high school curriculums, but they had nothing with regard to a previous statement issued by various civil groups emphasizing the importance of reinforcing the education of local awareness," Cheng Cheng-iok said.

KMT stole our policy, DPP says

PLAGIARIZED: Pan-green officials lined up to blast Lien Chan's reform plans, saying that they were a copy of President Chen's recent announcements

By Lin Chieh-yu and Huang Tai-lin

STAFF REPORTER

Monday, Nov 17, 2003,Page 3

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) yesterday said that a proposal by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan to draft a new constitution was a blatant rip-off of the ruling party's policy.

On Saturday, Lien mapped out a three-step plan for constitutional reform that will set in motion a referendum for a new constitution. The KMT's proposal puts a new constitution to the public vote two years earlier than President Chen Shui-bian's timetable outlined in September.

"Lien's three-step proposal is off-key. He has not only plagiarized our party's proposal but also proposed something in an imitative, contradictory and arbitrary way," DPP Deputy Secretary General Lee Ying-yuan said.

"The amendment of the Constitution is an important national reform plan that requires consolidating different opinions before setting up a timetable, but Lien has totally ignored the reality and brought up his proposal in a hasty way," Lee said, "Obviously, this is for the sake of the presidential election."

At a campaign rally in Taitung on Saturday, Chen told supporters that Lien's U-turn on the issue made a mockery of the Constitution.

Lien had earlier said that Chen's proposal to introduce a new constitution in 2006 was "nonsense."

Chen said that drawing up a new constitution was a serious issue and called on the opposition party to support a new constitutional draft proposed by the Executive Yuan.

Chen noted that the KMT had criticized him for his proposal on behalf of the DPP to introduce a new constitution in 2006 and denounced the plan as a dangerous move that would bring Taiwan into a war.

"It is incoherent for the KMT to denounce my referendum proposal but bring up a new constitutional plan that will be held two years earlier than the DPP's," Chen said.

Chen said that his planned constitutional referendum in 2006 requires two-and-a-half years of preparation, including the establishment of a committee composed of academics and experts from different fields, introducing a draft of the new constitution in 2004 and calling a national meeting to discuss it in 2005.

Chen said, "The new constitution cannot be drawn up by one party, so we will invite the ruling and opposition parties to join the meeting, and, after reaching a consensus, we will bring it to our citizens and call a referendum in 2006. Then the constitution will be announced in 2007 and implemented in 2008 by the new president."

Chen added that it is impossible for Lien to implement his plan, as there is not enough time to call a referendum by the end of the next year and the passage of the constitution requires the support of three-quarters of the legislature.

Lee said, "It is impossible for the KMT to implement its plan in the legislature that is equally divided between the blue and green camps."

"Moreover, the pan-blue camp is still divided on the new constitutional proposal," he said. "As it is still a question of whether the pan-blue camp will support the new constitution, it takes time for negotiation and cannot be decided by one person."

Lee noted that even Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou, a KMT political star, had expressed a different view from Lien.

"After Ma denounced Chen's constitutional proposal at [Saturday's] rally, Lien came up with his proposal," he said, "That not only embarrasses Ma but also highlights the internal conflict in the pan-blue camp."

The pro-independence Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), however, described the pan-blue camp, the KMT and PFP, as being "able to return to the proper path after going astray."

TSU legislative caucus leader Cheng Chien-ming said, "We are glad to hear Lien's proposal, such as entitling citizenship to those who are above 18 years of age, two votes for a single electoral district, a voluntary armed forces and calling a referendum, completely follow the DPP and TSU's policy."

"They would be wrong if they try to cheat to win votes," Chen said. "It only proves that the KMT and PFP have been fooling the Taiwanese people by claiming the new constitution will provoke China to invade Taiwan, and that will only raise doubts among non-aligned voters."

Pan-blue members approved of Lien's proposal, with several pan-blue legislators noting that Lien's proposal was a change of the pan-blue camp's campaign strategy from defensive to offensive.

PFP whip Chou Hsi-wei said the main plank of the alliance's new constitution draft "is to assert the Republic of China's sovereignty."

Noting that Chen Shui-bian had proposed holding a referendum on a new constitution in 2006 but that it won't be enacted until May 20, 2008, Chou criticized Chen for "knowing only how to propose questions but not answers."

"The KMT-PFP alliance, on the other hand, faces the constitution issue with a pragmatic attitude," Chou said. "Lien clearly proposed a timetable and wished to correct the contradictory parts in the Constitution via amendments and then promote constitutional reform through a referendum."

KMT Legislator Wu Den-yih, accused Chen of only introducing the idea of a new constitution and yet presenting no substantial contents.

Wu said Lien's proposal was meant to force Chen to define his position on the new constitution.

More than lip service to be paid to free speech

By Cheng Tzu-leong

Monday, Nov 17, 2003,Page 8

The controversial Special Report VCD -- which contains personal attacks on People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong and other opposition politicians -- has led us to wonder: Apart from the freedom-of-speech issue, why have such alternative media appeared in Taiwan where the communication industry is highly developed?

Legislators are not the only ones who enjoy the freedom of speech. Many lawmakers who wag their tongues recklessly usually hide under the umbrella of legislative immunity. They often make irresponsible remarks and completely ignore the feelings of the accused. However, once they are criticized, they rush to court and file lawsuits.

Take Special Report for example. PFP Legislator Chiu Yi, who was a National Taiwan University professor, filed a lawsuit against the production simply because he is called a "roaring beast" in the VCDs -- which sounds like the word "professor" in Chinese. On one hand, those lawmakers have lost their magnanimity in the face of public criticism. On the other hand, some of them have downgraded themselves to the status of domestic subjects of Soong by filing a lawsuit for him. If Soong feels wronged by the VCDs, he should file a lawsuit by himself.

Next, why have such VCDs appeared in Taiwan where the communication industry is highly developed and the number of broadcast channels is large? The Special Report VCD is considered alternative or underground. Such options appear when society's mainstream media only allow for one voice. They exist in many developing, or even developed, countries worldwide.

From the underground magazines during the tangwai (outside the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT]) movement in the two Chiang's autocratic era in the past, to the illegal radio stations before the opening of Taiwan's radio channels, they were all alternative media that presented views different from those of the mainstream media.

Taiwan's television industry is well-developed today, as viewers often enjoy at least 70 to 80 channels. However, this situation is an example of US academic Theodore Peterson's criticism on newspaper liberalism 30 years ago. As he said, gigantic and centralized media may depart from the spirit of a free-speech market, as their owners attempt to achieve political or economic goals through them, sacrificing opposite opinions while boycotting social reforms. Under such circumstances, as he said, the media may become another social and economic class that hampers the freedom of speech and public interests as well.

Taiwan's TV stations have leaned toward commercial interests on the one hand and centralized political ideologies on the other. Most political commentary talk shows on TV are hosted by opposition politicians or those who lean toward the blue camp. As a result, rebuking President Chen Shui-bian and former president Lee Teng-hui has become a daily routine on those talk shows.

Under such circumstances, Special Report was produced because the voice of Taiwan's grassroots can hardly be heard in the so-called mainstream media. The Taiwanese people's freedom of speech should certainly be respected. Besides, the contents of the VCD are not completely worthless. The VCD, which alleges that Soong may have liver cancer, has reflected some people's doubts.

Freedom of speech is the foundation of democratic politics, and it should be protected and regulated by the law. Politicians should not be afraid of it, and they are not the only ones who enjoy it.

Cheng Tzu-leong is a professor in the Department of Advertising at National Chengchi University.

Real power resides on the streets

By Wang Kun-yi 王崑義

Monday, Nov 17, 2003,Page 8

After two massive demonstrations were held to call for a change of the nation's title to "Taiwan" and the holding of referendums, the question that the Democratic Progressive Party has most frequently been asked is why a ruling party that already has political power in its hands still appeals to people to take to the street to "seize power?"

Aside from former president Lee Teng-hui's explanation that they are, respectively, aimed at shaping Taiwanese consciousness and establishing the Taiwanese "entity" concept, the main reason, actually, should be for the DPP to retake its cultural hegemony on the streets.

The streets were originally the DPP's biggest battlefield. The DPP has prospered by riding on new social movements springing up in Taiwan since the 1980s. It repeatedly launched campaigns to call for political reforms and staged street demonstrations to challenge the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) authoritarian system.

Moreover, various organizations formed by laborers, farmers, environmentalists, consumers, women, Aborigines and students also turned the streets into a colorful athletic field, allowing civil society to gradually break away from the KMT's tight grip.

Amid the political and social movements rising and developing one after another, this trend of democratization has generated a new progressive force in Taiwanese society.

Realizing that this trend was irresistible, former president Chiang Ching-kuo once said that the world is changing, trends are changing, and so the nation has to change. He resolutely lifted martial law and allowed Taiwanese people to visit their relatives in China, leaving a big hole in the closed authoritarian system.

After Lee came to power, he utilized the opportunity to adjust the nation's structure and reconstruct social order, helping the trend of democratization further take root in Taiwanese society. The re-emergence of national and social forces successfully drove away the extreme power exercised by the military government that had traditionally controlled Taiwanese society.

After President Chen Shui-bian took office in 2000, two conflicting forces took shape due to the economic slowdown in the greater environment and strong boycotts maneuvered by the restoration forces in the blue camp. The old power-bearers raised the anti-reform banner to strike at the legitimacy of the reforms that the DPP has always advocated, placing the Chen administration in a precarious situation.

Apart from the forces opposing education reforms and privatization, the blue camp has created an atmosphere reminiscent of the beautiful era under Chiang's rule. All of a sudden, it seems that this would override the DPP's traditional call for reforms and become the new mainstream value in Taiwanese society.

Against this backdrop, the DPP, hailing from civil society, seems to have lost its "brave new world." Although the backlash force is not completely centered around political parties, the "cultural hegemony on the streets," after being eroded by non-political party forces, seems to be shifting toward opposition parties.

To prevent this hegemony from falling into enemies' hands, Chen in a timely manner advocated holding referendums and creating a constitution. He attempts to use political issues to override the resurgence of the old power that makes social and economic issues its keynote platform.

This effort has prevented the hegemony from swiftly shifting toward the opposition forces.

Of course, Chen's call for referendums and a new constitution mainly aims at agitating confrontation between these two camps, leaving no grey area in a society that traditionally has middle-ground forces as its mainstay. The voters therefore have to take a stand between the green and blue camps.

Chen thus is able to solidify the DPP's sphere of influence on the streets. Since the backlash force is deprived of an opportunity to spread toward other social groups, its effect is relatively dwindling.

In a strategy of "converging columns for concerted attacks," former president Lee has become a new leader on the streets by holding a demonstration to call for a name change for Taiwan and, as a result, consolidated and retook the green camp's power on streets. The power generated by Chen and Lee after they exchanged roles has written a new page in Taiwan's democratization.

In the KMT-ruled era, rulers used political and military power to forcibly monopolize society. After the DPP came to power, it has used social force to take the leading role in operating the state apparatus, being always sensitive to society. Monopolization is deficient in justice and an ideology jointly constructed with society.

So the fact that the DPP can readily recapture its power on the streets only reflects the fragility of the blue camp's street ideology.

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