Editorials: Let the debate highlight differences

The two main candidates in next year's presidential election -- President Chen Shui-bian and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan -- have agreed to hold a debate on the issues of referendums and a new constitution. This is a ray of sunshine amidst today's negative campaigning. Finally, candidates can put negative campaigning aside and debate their visions for the nation's future.

Voters have lost their appetites recently because of quarrels in the media, the groundless criticisms that fly between the pan-green and pan-blue camps and the dispute over the controversial Special Report VCDs. But Chen and Lien are now bringing the campaign back on track. Constitutional reform, referendums, and cross-strait relations are the topics that people really want to hear the candidates talk about. We hope that the debate will set a high standard for the presidential election campaign.

Although a great ideological divide separates the blue and green camps, their opinions on the constitution issue have converged. Lien's first reaction was to call the idea of a new constitution "Boring!" Later he suggested that a constitutional amendment committee be set up following the election. Recently he proposed a three-step plan for a new constitution.

In form, Lien's current proposal is a copy of the DPP's longstanding call for a new constitution, but it differs in its spirit. This may cause public confusion about the blue and green camps' constitutional proposals. A debate between Chen and Lien might allow the public to clearly see the two proposals' advantages and disadvantages.

The DPP emphasizes a democratic process for constitutional changes. It favors a bottom-up approach without any conditions, and adheres to the principle that the decision should be made by the people in a referendum. Issues such as the nation's name, flag and borders would have to be resolved separately.

The KMT, on the other hand, has allowed a core group of policymakers to decide that a new constitution could not touch on the issue of the nation's name and flag.

The KMT has also proposed a faster schedule than has the DPP, but the KMT wants to amend the Constitution through the Legislative Yuan, elect members to an extraordinary National Assembly to add provisions for a referendum on the Constitution, and use the referendum procedures in the amended Constitution to complete the process. Such a process would be too complicated and would contain too many variables.

Taiwan's political problems -- past, present and future -- boil down to the China problem. Sooner or later, the Constitution must clearly differentiate Taiwan from China.

Chen and Lien both say that Taiwan is a sovereign state. Chen describes Taiwan and China as being "one country on each side" of the Taiwan Strait, while Lien says they belong to one China -- the Republic of China (ROC).

Although Lien's statement is consistent with the KMT's China policy, he must explain why there is only one China when both the PRC and the ROC are sovereign states. Most nations in the world have recognized the PRC for half a century, but Lien now wants to persuade them that there is no PRC, but only the ROC. This is wishful thinking, and it runs counter to international understanding of the situation.

We hope that Lien will be able to present an effective argument to persuade not only the Taiwanese people but also China and the international community that they ought to accept his one China theory.

Taiwan, tell us who you are

Most Americans learned about Taiwan because of the Little League World Series, which it seems was always won by the Taiwanese kids. Other than that, Taiwan rarely comes up on the average American's radar screen. This is because our media here in the States is dominated by liberals, who are rapidly becoming a minority as they continue to criticize the Bush administration and the policies of the Republicans. The Democratic Party here is no longer in touch with the people and their interests. Between big business interests (drooling over the looming consumer market in China) and the liberals' eagerness to avoid conflict, we do not get a clear picture of Taiwan. And Taiwan does not help clarify the situation.

As a result of these dynamics, all the average person hears is that there is some sort of confusion about this possible rogue province of mainland China that sits on the brink of yet another American war.

I wonder if the world knows how strongly the American people support Bush and his administration. He is supported because he is strong in principle and resolve; he speaks for the greater good.

Americans need to hear from Taiwan about its identity. Who are you? Where are you going? Clean up your politics and create a new constitution that is legitimate. (Note that Japan is talking about a new constitution.) Declare yourselves Taiwanese. Make it clear that the Chinese flight from the mainland was little more than an occupation like the one the Japanese perpetrated. Reveal your culture and Taiwanese heritage to the world in a massive public relations campaign. Continue the policy of an official name change. Hold a referendum on independence. I know the US is putting strong pressure against this -- they must, in light of their special interest in China. But once the people of Taiwan have spoken, the people of the US will absolutely support a position as democratic as this. Then our politicians will have a hard time telling us lies and suppressing the evolution of Taiwan as a free nation. Look how far we are willing to go to protect the rights of people in the Middle East.

The UN should have long before now accepted Taiwan, but they too can plead confusion as to exactly what Taiwan is and what it wants.

Taiwan -- a country with its own heritage (mixed with other regional influences), a modern constitution, a referendum mandate for self-determination, a representative government, and a formidable economic and developmental entity -- is something that Americans can understand. If this is something that Taiwan is willing to fight for, then I think you will find a friend and willing ally at your side. Just tell us who you are and what you want. Be strong in principle and resolve. Speak for the greater good of your people and let's move beyond old world threats into the future.

Aborigines call Chen twelve names

By Lin Chieh-yu

STAFF REPORTER

Saturday, Nov 22, 2003,Page 3

Pro-Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) members of Taiwan's 12 Aboriginal tribes yesterday formed an "Aboriginal Knights of the Round Table" to support President Chen Shui-bian's bid for a second term.

Hundreds of tribal representatives gathered yesterday in Taipei to express gratitude to President Chen for implementing policies promoting the welfare of Aboriginal communities during his time as president.

Dressed in rain shoes and headscarves, the representatives said they wanted to acknowledge the president's sincerity in visiting each of the tribes.

"We are here to announce that President Chen is a member of each tribe and that all 12 tribes will honor the president with a name in each of our languages," said an Aboriginal elder.

Amis representatives granted the president the name of "Mahengheng," which means a warrior who never concedes defeat and always triumphs in battle. Atayal representatives chose "Qebuta," which means a hero who leads the people to a new paradise, while Paiwan representatives selected "Tanuvak," used to mark a warrior who excels in defense.

Bunun representatives chose the name "Kavaslavian," which signifies a hero who hunts the heads of enemies and advances the tribe, while Rukai representatives called the president "Pacak," honoring him as a supreme king.

Tao representatives offered the name "Simagalelaw" in praise of the president.

Peinan representatives called the president "Kelalaw," the Tsou representatives used the name "Avay," and the Taroko tribe selected "Watan-rulung," each meaning that Chen was a brave warrior.

Saisiat representatives called the president "Kalahayta-in," meaning a master of supernatural power, while Kavalan representatives gave Chen the name "Padada-mes" in approval of his dedication to the country.

Finally, Thao representatives named Chen "Yaminasaw," meaning that the president was a member of their tribe.

"I am proud of being accepted as a member of your tribes today with these titles of honor. They illustrate the vitality of Taiwan's diverse cultures, and these are the most valuable assets the country possesses," Chen said.

Chen vowed to continue protecting Aboriginal cultures and to help Aboriginal people recover their tribal dignity.

"The more we value Aboriginal history and achievements, the sooner this country will reach a state of ethnic harmony," he said.

"And it is my duty to maintain an equilibrium between all tribes as well as other ethnic groups in the country to build a future for all," Chen added.

Chen then presented purple suits to the representatives to mark the founding of the organization.

US would accept referendum and a new Taiwan constitution, senior official says

By Charles Snyder

STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON

Saturday, Nov 22, 2003,Page 3

"We understand their interest in pursuing a referendum toward a new constitution."

－Randall Schriver, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific

As China ratchets up its rhetoric over President Chen Shui-bian's determination to write a new constitution for Taiwan, a senior US official has said that Washington would accept the new document as long as it does not extend to decisions regarding Taiwan's independence.

"We understand their interest in pursuing a referendum toward a new constitution," Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific, Randall Schriver, told the Washington press corps on Thursday.

At the same time, Washington has been clear that it does not support Taiwan's independence.

"So, if any of these efforts touch on Taiwan's status in a way that [moves toward independence], we're not going to be supportive of that," he said.

Schriver stated, however, "whether to change the constitution is really Taiwanese domestic politics. We don't want to overly influence that," he said.

"So, it is really a matter of whether these efforts [to write a new constitution] are going to spill into those areas or lead us in that direction [toward independence]. If that's the case, the United States will not support it," Schriver said.

The State Department official's comments were believed to be the first time a senior US official has commented on the constitution itself. Most previous comments have focused on the plan for a referendum, which Washington officials have feared would deal with independence and independence-related issues, such as a change in the official name from the Republic of China.

It is certainly the first time that an administration official has said Washington would look acceptingly at a new constitution.

On the apparent rising verbal cross-strait tensions over the past week, Schriver said that "the volume is up a little bit, the rhetoric is up."

"We take that to mean that there are serious concerns in Beijing, and we listen to those, we acknowledge those," he said.

He confirmed that the issue was raised this week when his boss, Assistant Secretary James Kelly, visited Beijing and talked with senior Chinese foreign policy officials.

"He had an opportunity to reiterate our policy that our one-China policy is based on the three communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act, our non-support for Taiwanese independence, our opposition to the use of force.

"And he addressed some of our views about the ongoing [Taiwanese presidential] election campaign, that we support Taiwan's democracy, we support the electoral process, but we are neutral, we do not favor one candidate or another, nor are we in any way involved in shaping campaign policies or positions.

"These are the domestic politics of Taiwan, and the campaigns are unfolding as they see fit," Schriver said.

Regarding his statement about shaping campaign policies, Schriver noted that China has indicated it feels that the US has a hand in Taiwan's election campaigns.

Cabinet thanks US for firm `no force' position

BY MELODY CHEN

STAFF REPORTER

Saturday, Nov 22, 2003,Page 3

The Cabinet yesterday thanked the US Department of State for its opposition to the use of force to solve cross-strait tensions, as China sharpens its rhetoric on what it calls President Chen Shui-bian's separatist attempts.

Amid escalating verbal warnings from China this week, Cabinet Spokesman Lin Chia-lung said the government "welcomes and thanks" a senior US official's message to China not to use military force against Taiwan.

Key part

On Thursday, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific, Randall Schriver, told the Taiwan Washington press corps that opposition to the use of force is one of the key parts of the US' one-China policy.

Schriver said if the Taiwanese government's efforts to write a new constitution are going to lead toward independence, the US will not support these moves.

But he also stated that Washington would accept the new constitution as long as it does not extend to decisions regarding Taiwan's independence.

Vice Chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council Johnnason Liu said Schriver's comments showed the US has been consistent on its cross-strait policy.

Calling on China not to misjudge the Taiwanese government's efforts to deepen the country's democracy by introducing a new constitution and referendums, Lin said Taiwan's determination to defend its democracy should not be underestimated.

He also asked China not to maliciously distort the US' promise to preserve peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.

"It is in the US and Taiwan's common interest to prevent any bilateral change in the cross-strait status quo. Taiwan will continue its communication with the US to avoid any attempt to change the status quo by force," Lin said.

The US has stated that it only accepts peaceful solutions pertaining to cross-strait relations. The US' commitment to peace can be seen in the Taiwan Reactions Act and the three communiques, Lin said.

Stressing that "the Republic of China in Taiwan is a sovereign country," Lin said no nation should interfere with Taiwan's introduction of a new constitution and referendums because "these are Taiwan's domestic affairs.

"We cannot accept nor tolerate China's attempt to occupy Taiwan by force and destroy its democracy," he said.

Support

Schriver also showed support for American Institute in Taiwan Chairwoman Therese Shaheen, who has recently drawn criticism from China, and Taiwan's opposition parties, for describing US President George W. Bush as Taiwan's "guardian angel" and Taiwan's purchase of submarines from the US as "silly."

Lin said Shaheen's remarks reflect the US government's stance and her support for Taiwan's democracy.

She said she would back the president elected by the people of Taiwan.

"But she did not show particular favor to any one presidential candidate," Lin said.

"The Cabinet regrets that some opposition politicians maliciously criticized Shaheen's behavior. We hope the domestic presidential campaign will not damage Taiwan's relationship with the US," he said.

China tightens its rules on Internet address managers

REUTERS , BEIJING

Saturday, Nov 22, 2003,Page 5

China has issued stricter rules for companies that manage Internet addresses, in a move analysts said was designed to improve service standards as well as tighten control over sensitive information in the burgeoning sector.

Such firms, known in the industry as registrars, must now have a minimum of one million yuan (US$121,000) in start-up capital, at least 15 employees and offer 24-hour customer service, the regulation, issued on Thursday, said. Previous rules had been vague.

They "must have strict and effective filtering mechanisms for cleaning bad and offensive domain names, which should be done once a day," the Ministry of Information Industry, which issued the articles, said on its Web site www.mii.gov.cn.

The firms, which number about 30 so far in China and serve mostly companies with their own Web sites, must also be registered with the powerful Ministry of Culture as proper Internet content providers, it said.

Industry watchers said the new rules formalized government control over the fast-growing Internet domain name sector where not all participants toe the Communist Party line on democracy, free speech and adult content.

"Small companies without an established investment and physical presence are much more likely to disregard regulations," said Nathan Midler, a research manager at IDC Asia Pacific.

"Companies with a substantial investment have a vested interest in cooperating," he said.

Diplomats say Chinese leaders know they must promote the free flow of information on the Internet for China to be a respected member of the international community, but are unwilling to face the potential criticism that freedom of speech can unleash.

Beijing has a special force of at least 30,000 "cyber cops" who patrol the Web, block some foreign news sites and shut down domestic sites with politically incorrect fare.

Courtroom cameras enhance public trust

By Lo Ping-cheng
Saturday, Nov 22, 2003,Page 8

`By all means, the Zanadau case is a judicial issue ... Politics should not interfere with the judicial system, but the judges themselves can hardly ignore politics.'

Many media outlets were disappointed that they could not gain access to the court where former president Lee Teng-hui testified on the Zanadau investment case; there were not enough seats. This once again highlighted the issue of how much access the media should have to court hearings and whether the hearings should be broadcast live. The debate mainly centers on whether cameras in court would interfere with the court's operation. The judiciary and the media think differently about the issue and it is hard to draw a conclusion.

By all means, the Zanadau case is a judicial issue. Yet nobody would naively regard it as a purely judicial case. Politics should not interfere with the judicial system, but the judges themselves can hardly ignore politics.

When there is concern that a trial regarding a highly controversial political case may be manipulated by political forces, the court should do what it can to avoid being used and maintain its independent discretion. A fair judicial system, as demanded by the public, depends on every single case being handled openly and fairly.

Based on his duty to uncover the truth and realize justice, the judge who tried the Zanadau case summoned Lee to testify. His fairness in summoning all concerned, including a former president, is worthy of recognition.

An open trial with a limited audience is legal but not good enough. After all, few judicial cases receive so much attention from the media. It is not only about protecting press freedoms and the public's right to know but also a precious opportunity to educate the public about the rule of law. Unfortunately, our conservative judicial system has missed an opportunity.

If the court hearing that Lee attended had been broadcast live, the cross examination between the prosecutor and defendant would have been transmitted to every home and workplace. Such coverage would not only have satisfied the public's curiosity about the Zanadau case but would also have enhanced the visibility of the new legal practices based on amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure. Such media education would be far more extensive and effective than any public announcements by the Judicial Yuan and would be good for building the public's confidence in the judicial system.

The mishandling of several major cases by the judiciary in the past has raised doubts among the public. As judicial reforms start to bear fruit, the judiciary cannot afford to fail in such a high-profile case as the Zanadau case. Maybe the system needs to be flexible at times. More open marketing is necessary to win the public's trust in the judicial system.

Lo Ping-cheng is a lawyer and an executive member of the Judicial Reform Foundation.