Culture of Hakkas, in crisis, needs protection

By Richard Huang

Sunday, Dec 14, 2003,Page 8

National Central University in Chungli founded the College of Hakka Studies this year. National Chiao Tung University in Hsinchu and National United University in Miaoli are said to have plans for setting up Hakka colleges. These three universities are located in cities with large Hakka populations. Despite coming late, this is something to look forward to.

Although Taiwan has around 2 million Hakka people, the Hakka language and culture have withered. Only the elderly know the Hakka culture, while some middle-aged and younger Hakka aren't even able to speak the Hakka language.

Due to a lack of institutions, relevant documents have never been systematically collected. Anyone who understands Hakka culture must feel a strong sense of crisis. It is time to salvage the Hakka history and culture.

Despite the great number of Hakka people in Taiwan, they have been at a disadvantage politically and economically. To adapt themselves and make a living, Hakka people often find themselves hiding their language and culture while learning the language and culture of the major ethnic group. As time passes, many Hakka people have forgotten their language and culture, and, after several generations, even their Hakka status.

In a democratic era, political and economic power is proportional to the number of people because one person has one vote. The situation is different under an authoritarian regime, where a minority group often rules the majority and monopolizes national resources.

Riding on the democratization trend, Taiwan's political and economic structure has changed and Hakka people no longer need to hide their identity as their social status has improved. Many politicians even claim to be Hakka so as to win over the ethnic community's support.

Now there is a ray of hope for Hakka history and culture. As mentioned above, Hakka culture is gradually disappearing. Local researchers' efforts still fail to be fully accepted by universities and colleges, although there are some courses and research centers. Setting up a department or graduate institute dedicated to Hakka studies in a university means that Hakka culture is accepted and supported by society, fully legitimate.

The idea of cultural diversity recognizes that different ethnic communities and cultures exist in harmony, and that they don't have strive to become more alike.

To preserve cultural diversity, cultural chauvinism displayed by the mainstream culture should be restrained and disadvantaged groups and their culture should be bolstered to avoid extinction. This way, various ethnic groups and cultures can communicate on an equal basis and enrich the overall cultural life.

In present-day Taiwan, Hakka and indigenous cultures are faced with cultural crises and require protection. This is not to protect these two cultures alone, but to safeguard Taiwan's cultural diversity. This has become a new type of human rights in today's world -- the right of culture.

But there are some hidden worries in this seemingly favorable situation.

It might be difficult to recruit qualified teachers and outstanding students if several colleges or graduate institutes for Hakka studies were to be established within a short period of time. The timing of the foundation of new institutions and enrollment of students should be coordinated as soon as possible. In any case, Hakka people should seize this historic opportunity to make these institutions a success. Otherwise, the Hakka people's century-old expectations will be dashed and the concept of cultural diversity in Taiwan will not be implemented.

Richard Hwang is a research fellow of the Institute of European and American Studies, Academia Sinica.

China's economy is rotting within

Rosy statistics cannot disguise the chronic mismanagement and the administrative ineptitude that threaten China's future

By Sushil Seth

Sunday, Dec 14, 2003,Page 9

There is no shortage of stories about China's economic growth. But the figures remain dodgy. In his statement to the US Senate Finance Committee on April 6, 2000, Nicholas Lardy, an expert on China's economy at the Brookings Institution, said: "The official data overstate the pace of economic expansion ... over the past decade there has been an extraordinary buildup of unsold and unsalable inventories."

He continued: "On average, [from] 1990 to 1998 annual additions to inventories in China absorbed 42 per cent of incremental output. While some increase in inventories is needed to support higher levels of output, the disproportionately large inventory buildup in China reflects the continued production of low-quality goods for which there is little or no demand."

This is reminiscent of the Soviet Union, where production targets were met irrespective of low consumer demand for shoddy goods.

Then there is the story of ever-increasing investment of foreign funds in China. This again is dubious. For instance, the amount of capital illicitly transferred overseas actually exceeded the amount of foreign investment in China in the year 2000.

The Yangcheng Evening News has also written: "On the one hand, the government is making big efforts to attract foreign investment. On the other hand, large amounts of capital are fleeing overseas. In the face of these facts, who wouldn't be heartbroken?"

At another level, China's non-performing bank loans are a major worry. According to credit rating agency Moody's, "the health of the state banks remains a central concern ... Chinese banks overall lent more in the first seven months" of this year than in all of the previous year.

The transfer of some non-performing loans -- about US$170 billion in 1999 and early 2000 -- to asset management companies has not resolved the problem because the companies are not able to sell the loans even with big discounts.

The government tends to squander its people's hard earned savings, deposited mostly with state banks. Writing in the New York Review of Books in 1998, Liu Binyan and Perry Link said that "as of early 1997, almost half of the money in personal savings accounts [two trillion yuan, or US$240 billion] had been lost" in bad loans. Things do not seem to have changed much since then.

There isn't much hope that things will get any better because of the systemic corruption that exists. The rot starts at the top. As He Qinglian pointed out in her book, China's Pitfall, the urban economic boom in the 1990s amounted to "a process in which power-holders and their hangers-on plundered economic wealth."

She added, "The primary target of their plunder was state property that had been accumulated from 40 years of the people's sweat, and their primary means of plunder was political power."

The link between power holders and China's new robber-baron class spawned by them is still strong.

According to journalist Julie Chao, "Graft is endemic in China, where personal relationships still count more than rule of law. Anything is for sale, from police complicity in smuggling rackets to acquiring land, where buyers can kick off the farmers and build a golf course or hotel or office building."

And she quotes economist Hu Angang's estimate that over the past decade corruption has cost China the equivalent of roughly 15 percent of its GDP annually in lost taxes, tariffs and skimming of public funds.

In this climate of anything goes, the poor are also seeking to sell anything they possibly can. Jonathan Watts has chronicled the story of blood sales by Henan's poor in The Guardian. In the midst of rampant poverty in the province, where the "average farmer survives on 78 cents per day," this was all they had left to sell to supplement their income. The resulting HIV contamination has affected an estimated 1 million people in Henan Province.

This problem is not confined to one province. In his novel Chronicle of a Blood Merchant, Yu Hua highlights this problem. In a recent interview, Yu said: "Selling blood has become a means of survival for the poor."

"Blood-selling villages pop up one after another, and in these villages almost every family sells blood," he added.

It is estimated that by 2010 there might be as many as 10 million cases of HIV in China. Officially, the number now is only 40,000. Such illusory statistics are a Chinese specialty.

The ghoulish nature of Chinese statistics can also be seen in the justice system. Executions are a ubiquitous feature of Chinese justice, and according to China's New Rulers, a book quoting secret party documents, 60,000 Chinese were killed -- executed or shot dead while fleeing police -- between 1998 and 2001. That works out at about 15,000 deaths a year. According to Nicholas Kristoff in The New York Times, this would mean "that 97 percent of the world's executions take place in China."

Another coercive feature of life in China is the forced relocation of skilled workers from booming cities to poor western provinces, such as Inner Mongolia. According to Jehangir Pocha in San Francisco Chronicle, "thousands of students are experiencing a velvet-gloved version of China's Maoist past."

At the same time, there is the emergence of the low-paid house maid to service China's new middle class. As Jonathan Kaufman writes in The Wall Street Journal, "Ayis or `aunties,' as maids are known in Chinese, are a topic of constant discussion among Shanghai's growing middle class: where to find them, how to keep a good one."

Former Chinese president Jiang Zemin's much-heralded "Three Represents" is probably meant to reconcile all these contradictions. But China's new communist utopia is a nightmare of Kafkaesque proportions.

Sushil Seth is a freelance writer based in Sydney.

Nothing has changed in US policy

By the Liberty Times editorial

Sunday, Dec 14, 2003,Page 8

After the summit meeting between US President George W. Bush and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Bush, with respect to the issue of the situation in the Taiwan Strait, which is the focus of much public attention, indicated that the US' policy is a "one China" policy based on the Three Communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act.

Bush also said that the US opposes any unilateral change to the status quo, regardless of whether it is China or Taiwan that attempts to change it, and that the recent words and action of the leader of Taiwan indicate that he may have decided to make changes unilaterally, which is something that the US opposes.

Bush's words immediately made waves in Taiwan's political circles. All sorts of declarations and comments were released by the pan-blue and the pro-China camps, all severely criticizing the so-called irresponsibility of President Chen Shui-bian's government in putting the US-Taiwan relationship in the most precarious situation since the end of formal diplomatic ties between the two.

Some members of the media went hysterical, saying "do not let an election destroy the future of Taiwan," and deliberately spreading a sense of fear that we are at the brink of war and destruction.

It cannot be denied that Bush's words revealed suspicion on the part of the US government toward the Chen government's intention to hold a defensive public referendum on March 20.

The concern is apparently that the move could lead to a change in the status quo, triggering tension in the Taiwan Strait as a result.

Bush's statement can be characterized as very harsh, coming from someone who could be the most Taiwan-friendly president since the end of the formal diplomatic relationship between the two countries.

However, if we carefully analyze the recent words of Bush and US officials, without taking words out of context and without overinterpreting, this conclusion is inevitable: no matter how the US may change its wording, the core of its cross-strait policy continues to be opposition to unilateral change. Despite different packaging, the US' cross-strait policy has never departed from the core spirit and substance of the Three Communiques, the Taiwan Relations Act, the "one China" policy and the principle of "peaceful resolution."

In a nutshell, the point is to "maintain the status quo." In this spirit, though the US may have recognized Beijing as the sole legitimate government of China, and severed its diplomatic relationship with Taiwan, it merely acknowledges China's position that "Taiwan is part of China," but does not recognize that position as truth.

In other words, while the US understands China's position, it has given neither its approval nor agreement.

Moreover, the US' Taiwan Relations Act requires that its government assist Taiwan in defense. The US government therefore sells defensive arms to Taiwan based on this.

All this demonstrates the spirit of a policy to "maintain the status quo."

Still, since the substance of the US' cross-strait policy is to "maintain the status quo," and the theme of the defensive public referendum that Taiwan intends to hold is to "oppose Chinese missiles and demand peace," which is the equivalent of maintaining the status quo, it is very surprising that the US government has not expressed support of the referendum.

It is even more surprising to see so much skepticism from the US about the enactment of the Referendum Law and the holding of a defensive public referendum in Taiwan.

Frankly speaking, this US attitude is attributable to the Taiwanese government's failure to communicate sufficiently with the US and to the pro-China speeches made by some political parties and members of the media in Taiwan, as well as to China's deception.

As a result, the US mistook a measure that Taiwan is taking in self-defense as an attempt to change the status quo.

Taiwan is a sovereign independent country, and interference in its internal affairs by outsiders is not permissible. However, the US-Taiwan relationship is a special case. The two countries go back a long way and have gone through many crises together. The US is obligated to assist in Taiwan's self-defense under the Taiwan Relations Act. The cultural and economic exchanges between the two sides have been intensive.

Therefore, major cross-strait policy declarations and drafting of laws by Taiwan should be preceded by intimate discussions with the US, so as to attain a mutual understanding between the two sides and to ensure that policy directions are in the interests of both.

However, policy declarations by the Chen government, from "one country on each side (of the Taiwan Strait)," to "enacting a new constitution through a public referendum" to "defensive public referendum," which all strengthen Taiwan's democracy and sovereignty, were obviously not communicated to Taiwan's most important ally -- the US -- beforehand.

As a result, after the policies were announced, the US could not immediately grasp the substance of the matters. The deception and exaggeration by some politicians and commentators furthered the misleading impression that Taiwan is a troublemaker that goes out of its way to provoke China.

The US' cross-strait policy -- which is to "maintain the status quo" -- remains unchanged. While the US may have said some harsh things toward Chen, it has been right to the point with China as well, reiterating that if China used force against Taiwan, the US would not stay out of it.

The most important way that Taiwan can respond is not, as suggested by some members of the media and some politicians, to scrap the defensive public referendum, but rather to declare and publicize to the US and the international community that China has deployed 496 missiles on the other side of the Taiwan Strait, and that China continues to refuse to denounce the use of force against Taiwan.

Holding a public referendum in Taiwan is a way to express popular will against military threats.

The intention was never to change the status quo but to maintain the status quo. Isn't it odd to see robbers who threaten others with knives and guns as upholding the "status quo," while those asking the thugs to put down their knives are branded as "provoking" and "disrupting" the "status quo?"

In the US-China-Taiwan relationship, if power and muscle were the only things that mattered, and right and wrong made no difference, Taiwan's situation would of course be very difficult. However, we must remind the US that their country was founded in the spirit of respect for human rights, freedom and democracy. This is not to mention that all states of the US have referendum laws as well.

Even the US Congress has passed a resolution expressing respect for the Taiwanese people's right to decide their own future.

We don't understand why a little pressure from China is enough to make the US forget the spirit of its founders.

In particular, every battle fought by the US since the country was established has been to defend this principle and spirit. The US cannot sink to working with a notorious bully in oppressing a newly democratic country.

Wen has told the US that even if China had as much power as the US, it would never threaten other countries. Yet the truth is that after China gained some power, it began to crack down on and bully its neighbors. The US must not be deceived by China's campaign of sweet talk and propaganda.

The US should support Taiwan's defensive referendum and condemn China's missile deployment, so as to live up to its own founding spirit and its cross-strait policy, and to ensure real peace across the Taiwan Strait.

Editorial: Freeway halt deliberately ambiguous

On Thursday, Premier Yu Shyi-kun made a surprising announcement that the government would temporarily put on hold the construction of the planned Suao-Hualien Freeway. This stirred up much speculation about the timing of and the reasons for the Executive Yuan's decision and whether the freeway construction would be scrapped altogether.

However, there are reasons to believe President Chen Shui-bian's government still intends to proceed with the freeway construction, and that the delay is made in the hope of "making everyone happy by not acting in haste."

The timing of Yu's announcement was sensitive. It came the day before he gave a report in the legislature on the "New 10 Key Infrastructure Projects," of which the Suao-Hualien Freeway is a central part, and right before the construction was due to begin.

Surely, the Executive Yuan knew that this last-minute delay would create the impression of shifty policy-making, and that the opposition would seize this opportunity to say that this is a re-enactment of the construction halt to the "Fourth Nuclear Power Plant." This is not to mention that since the freeway construction was the first of the projects scheduled to begin among the "New 10 Key Infrastructure Projects," a construction halt would give a bad start to the implementation of a key policy.

Under the circumstances, what caused the Executive Yuan to make this decision? One important reason may be that the Chen government has decided that, during the last three months of the presidential campaign, it does not need the controversy and protest that are associated with virtually all major construction projects.

By now all politicians in Taiwan know that there is just no pleasing everyone when it comes to major development or constructions projects.

On the one hand, there are environmental activists. It should not be forgotten that many middle-class moderate voters in Taiwan, from whom Chen is eagerly trying to seek support in his re-election, identify with environmental protection ideals.

Moreover, Hualien County Commissioner Hsieh Shen-shan conceded that he had conveyed the concerns of the opponents of the freeway construction to the premier, something that many suspect played a key role in Yu's decision. This is not to mention that, reportedly, even Master Cheng Yen of the Buddhist Compassionate Relief Tzu Chi Foundation, who carries a lot of weight in Taiwanese society, has expressed concerns to the government about the freeway construction.

On the other hand, many local residents eagerly await the business opportunities and local development that will come after the freeway construction is completed.

By putting off the issue for now, the government can leave a little room for ambiguity, and delay enraging anyone until later after the election is over.

However, signs indicate that if re-elected, Chen will likely proceed with the freeway construction.

When Yu gave his report on the "New 10 Key Infrastructure Projects" in the Legislative Yuan on Friday, the Suao-Hualien Freeway remained a key part of the overall project. Yu also reiterated that the halt was simply a delay, which was intended to give the government more time to communicate with opponents of the project, and which should not be interpreted as anything final.

Moreover, while environmental protection was one of the planks of the campaign platform on which Chen was elected, Chen has learned the hard way during the three years of his presidency that many voters -- if they are asked to choose between bread on the table and preserving the environment -- will decide on the former. Under the circumstances, it is very likely that he will make pragmatic compromises accordingly.

Japanese body toasts emperor

BIRTHDAY PARTY: For the first time in 31 years, the Japanese emperor's birthday was celebrated in Taipei by the Japanese Interchange Association, against China's wishes

By Melody Chen

STAFF REPORTER

Sunday, Dec 14, 2003,Page 2

The Taipei Office of the Japanese Interchange Association (JIA) on Friday night held the first local celebration of Japanese Emperor Akihito's birthday since Japan severed diplomatic ties with Taiwan in 1972.

Defying unofficial protests by China against the celebration held by overseas Japanese embassies, the JIA Taipei Office, which is Japan's de facto diplomatic mission in Taiwan, threw a birthday party in Taipei's Ambassador Hotel.

Hailing the birthday celebration as a breakthrough, Katsuhisa Uchida, the mission's chief representative, said the party symbolizes the exuberant exchanges between Japan and Taiwan.

"The bilateral Japan-Taiwan relations will continue developing toward a more diversified future," said Uchida.

High-ranking government officials, including Presidential Secretary-General Chiou I-jen, Minister of Foreign Affairs Eugene Chien and Vice Chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vincent Siew, attended the celebrations.

The JIA Taipei Office kept details about the party quiet following China's failed diplomatic attempts to stop the event. The mission intended the celebration to be a closed-door event and only briefly allowed to the media inside.

The birthday celebration has increased the visibility of Japan-Taiwan relations, said the director of the Taiwan Thinktank's Foreign Policy Studies, Lai I-chung.

The party had some "symbolic meaning" and "China would not like to see things like this," Lai said.

The mission displayed pictures of the Japanese emperor and his wife on a big screen in the party hall and played the Japanese national anthem at the start of the celebrations.

Uchida and Hsu Shui-teh, president of Taiwan's Association of East Asian Relations, delivered speeches at the opening ceremony.

Although Japan cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan in 1972, the two countries have developed close trade and cultural relationships.

"It is a result of both sides' joint efforts," Uchida said.

Facing the trend of globalization, Japan and Taiwan will expand mutual exchanges to boost their substantial relationship, he said.

Pointing out that last year's trade volume between Japan and Taiwan reached US$39.2 billion, Hsu said Japan has replaced the US this year as Taiwan's largest trade partner.

"Japanese and Taiwanese tourists visit each other's countries very frequently. Various statistics show that Japan-Taiwan ties are very close and congenial," Hsu said.

After their speeches, Uchida and Hsu toasted the Japanese emperor, chanting: "Long live the emperor."

Chen has some questions for Hu Jintao

CAMPAIGN TRAIL: THe DPP endorsed the Chen-Lu candidacy, after which the president asked some taxing questions of his counterpart across the Taiwan Strait

By Chang Yun-ping

STAFF REPORTER

Sunday, Dec 14, 2003,Page 1

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) held a national congress yesterday to endorse the party's presidential campaign ticket featuring President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu.

Addressing the convention, staged as a gala-like campaign event, Chen raised three questions he would like to put to Chinese President Hu Jintao:

－Why can't Taiwan and China go their separate ways since they have antithetical political systems?

－Why can't China dismantle its missiles used to intimidate democratic Taiwan?

－And why can't Taiwan enter the World Health Organization?

"If the Beijing authorities can't provide answers to these questions, I believe the people of Taiwan will give their own answers on March 20," Chen said, reiterating his stance to hold a "defensive referendum" on the same day as the election.

Chen said that it was not his desire to hold a referendum which was the destabilizing factor in the region, but China's attempts to intimidate Taiwan, its missile build up and its refusal to renounce the use of force.

"It is China's military threat that would change the cross-strait status quo, not Taiwan's democratic practice of holding a referendum."

Chen stressed that the referendum was not intended to be provocative, but to safeguard Taiwan's security and that it would certainly not be cancelled as a result of threats by China.

"No matter how hegemonic China is and how much pressure Taiwan faces from such a power, Taiwan must insist on following the path of democracy," Chen said.

Speaking in his capacity as the DPP's flag-bearer, Chen yesterday also pledged to conduct a "fair, positive, and quality" campaign.

He also said he was willing to reconcile with the opposition parties, after a long period of inter-party feuding, for the sake of political harmony after the election.

"It is foreseeable that after the election next year, the domestic political situation is bound to have a new look due to the reintegration of party elements. The DPP is willing to attempt reconciliation with supporters of all political stripes to allay the negative effects of election feuding," Chen said.

The DPP's national congress yesterday also honored a total of 626 senior party members for their contribution to the process of Taiwan's democratization.

To gear up full support for Chen's re-election, seven counties and municipalities yesterday convened a campaign meeting prior to the national congress, with each administrative unit pledging to increase the DPP's total vote by 10 percentage points compared with the 2000 presidential election.

In Chiayi County yesterday, former President Lee Teng-hui extended his support for Chen's reelection bid and vowed to mobilize one million people on Feb. 28 for an island-wide rally.

Lee made the comments at the establishment of the Taiwan Solidarity Union's (TSU) Chiayi County Chapter. Lee founded the TSU in 2001, which has since become a strategic partner of the DPP.

Later yesterday the DPP staged a 100,000-people rally in Taipei County's Erchung Waterfront Park.

Chen and Lu, as well as the DPP's five major campaign leaders -- Premier Yu Shyi-kun, Presidential Secretary General Chiou I-jen, Taipei County Magistrate Su Chen-chang, Kaohsiung City Mayor Frank Hsieh and DPP Secretary General Chang Chun-hsiung -- all attended the rally.

Taiwanese shouldn't be pessimistic: Lu

Vice President Annette Lu was nominated to be President Chen Shui-bian's running mate on Thursday. Lu, who had adopted a low-key profile in the past several months, agreed to an interview with the `Taipei Times' right after the nomination. She talked to staff reporters Lin Chieh-yu and Debby Wu about US President George W.Bush's recent comments on Taiwan, their impact on Taiwan-US-China relations and what she sees as the key to winning next march's election

"In the past three years we have been eliminating old traditions and corruption, and we haven't got to the building stage yet. It is only fair to give us another four years because if the Lien-Soong ticket wins next year, it could be seen as the return of the old power and an unfortunate turn of events for our countrymen."

－Annette Lu, vice president

Taipei Times: After US President George W. Bush met Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, he told reporters: "We oppose any unilateral decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo, and the comments and actions made by the leader of Taiwan indicate that he may be willing to make decisions unilaterally to change the status quo, which we oppose."

The media interpreted his remarks as clear opposition to Taiwan holding a referendum and suggested that this would have a negative impact on Taiwan-US relationship. What do you think?

Annette Lu: This is a very ironical issue. The UN has emphasized that peace is a sacred human right. This is a very sardonic issue because Wen Jiabao is the person who is damaging the status quo in cross-strait relations, not to mention that China is a country which fully opposes the UN's aims of peace and human rights.

The US government, which admires democracy, freedom and human rights, surprisingly invited a leader from an authoritarian communist country to the White House while the leader of Republic of China [ROC], a country which fully practices the UN Charter, human rights and democracy, cannot be invited to visit Washington. The US still wants to please a dictator -- isn't that sardonic?

Bush did not make his point clearly in his remarks. He first warned China, and then when it came to Taiwan, he clearly pointed out the US opposed "a change of status quo," which Taiwanese read too much into.

Taiwan has been influenced by pessimism stemming from failures in the past -- the Taiwanese people were used to being administered and the good child has become a dumb child.

I hope our countrymen will not confine themselves -- because now they seem to want to confine the president and the vice president and tell them to stand in the corner as a punishment. It is China that has done wrong.

I think Bush's comments were minor criticism that were a major help to us. They helped Taiwan reach an emotional solidarity, and raised international concerns about the issue of Taiwan.

President Chen [Shui-bian]did not fail this time, and Taiwanese should applaud him because we made another breakthrough in the international blockade, and had an opportunity to tell the world that "it is China who should have to stand in the corner." This is the responsibility of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the overseas embassies and representative offices.

I don't think the Bush administration dares make a final decision on these issues. It has to face the US Congress, the media and win re-election. It also goes to Iraq to promote democracy, so reasonably Taiwan did not lose.

Taiwan now has turned the tables -- moving from defense to offense -- and this is a starting point created by President Chen.

TT: Has there been a change in the Bush administration's friendly attitude toward Taiwan? Is the Bush administration Taiwan's window of opportunity?

Lu: I have to point out that the Taiwan Strait doesn't belong to Taiwan. Every day there are over 400 international ships are moving in and out of Taiwan Strait. If the stability in the area is destroyed, this would be an international problem and Japan, the US and [South] Korea would all feel the impact.

From the perspective of universal values, Taiwan and the US share the same values. In its 200-year history, the US has not had a record of sacrificing its own founding values to please its enemies. It can compromise with its enemies, but it has never really sold its partners who share the same values down the river, so I don't believe the US will sacrifice Taiwan.

The interests and the values of Taiwan and the US are the same, and we have to start from there. Our countrymen should understand that. They should not think that the president [Chen] has said and done the wrong things.

The president in fact has grab-bed the best opportunity to highlight the crisis that Taiwan is facing and try to make international society understand.

Three years ago there was a Hollywood movie -- Thirteen Days -- and if our countrymen watch it they will understand that the entire US was tense when there were only a few missiles in Cuba aimed at the US.

Cuba is some distance from the US, unlike the close distance between Fujian Province and Taiwan, and the hundreds of missiles aimed at us.

Therefore, by this chance, we need to make our countrymen become aware of the crisis, so Taiwan this time did not lose any points but scored some more. We have begun to raise awareness in Taiwan of national defense -- with this time and this chance.

Meanwhile, we want to tell the whole world that the threat posed by the hundreds of missiles deployed by China is more real than the virtual threat posed by the so-called weapons of mass destruction owned by [former president] Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

As long as we explain ourselves clearly to both international and domestic society, we will win on this issue.

TT: As vice president, what suggestions would you make to the new generation of the leaders in Beijing?

Lu: If China wants to play the role of a respected leader on the international stage in the 21st century, then the speeches and actions of its leaders need to make the public feel that China is acting according to universal values and international norms.

Now is not a time of military threat and oppression, now is a generation of `gentle country' power. Given that human-rights problems keep occurring in China -- if the basic issue of people's livelihoods does not match human-rights standards, China will not have the credentials to become the new world leader.

I want to quote from the Shang-hai Communique signed by China and the US in 1972. The Chinese side stated: `Wherever there is oppression, there is resistance. Countries want independence, nations want liberation and the people want revolution -- this has become the irresistible trend of history. All nations, big or small, should be equal: big nations should not bully the small and strong nations should not bully the weak. China will never be a superpower and it opposes hegemony and power politics of any kind.'

The Chinese side stated that it: `Firmly supports the struggles of all the oppressed people and nations for freedom and liberation and that the people of all countries have the right to choose their social systems according their own wishes and the right to safeguard the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of their own countries and oppose foreign aggression, interference, control and subversion.'

This is such a wonderful document. I present this solemnly to [Chinese President] Hu Jintao and [Chinese Premier] Wen Jiabao as a gift, and ask them to reread this great document.

TT: How will the Chen-Lu ticket persuade the electorate to give it another four years?

Lu: When it comes to next year's presidential election, after four years [Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman] Lien Chan and [People First Party Chairman] James Soong have finally gotten used to being in the opposition, and Chen and Lu have become familiar with being in power.

If Chen-Lu ticket had not won the 2000 election, but the old powers had won, Taiwan might have gone into a situation we dare not imagine because there would have been no way to deal with corruption, and many concepts would have still remained stale, conservative and feudal.

At least we have proposed many new concepts. The Democratic Progressive Party's [DPP] economic achievements during these years in power can be divided into four aspects:

First, Taiwan has enjoyed a better economic growth rate than the European Union and Japan.

Second, Taiwan has had a lower unemployment rate than Hong Kong and the European Union.

Third, foreign exchange re-serves. In 2000 we had US$106.7 billion and now, after three-and-half years, it's US$203.8 billion -- that is to say that after four years, next May our foreign exchange reserves will be double what they were in 2000.

Fourth, in the Global Competitiveness Report by the World Economic Forum, Taiwan was ranked fifth in the world this year. The four countries in front of Taiwan were all North American and European countries. We were number one in Asia and Japan was only ranked 11th.

International society has been positive about us. How can we say that President Chen doesn't know how to run a country?

The transfer of power in 2000 has resulted in social chaos and political frictions, but that's an inevitable process.

A 55-year-old administration left us with a lot of baggage and corruption, and four years is too short a time. I don't think the transfer of power has been completed.

We succeeded in winning the country in 2000, but we will only start to govern the country in 2004.

In the past three years we have been eliminating old traditions and corruption, and we haven't got to the building stage yet.

It is only fair to give us another four years because if the Lien-Soong ticket wins next year, it could be seen as the return of the old power and an unfortunate turn of events for our countrymen.

TT: The opposing parties have tried to split different generations and ethnic groups, and accused the DPP administration of leaving huge debts for posterity. What do you think of that?

Lu: When the KMT stepped down in 2000, they left a debt of NT$2.5 trillion, including money that had gone to unknown destinations and perhaps disappeared through corruption. It was the KMT government that left a huge debt for posterity.

The DPP government has raised the [level of] government debt to finish the public infrastructure projects that were not done by the previous government. Now we are filling the holes left by the previous government, strengthening basic infrastructure such as drains and transportation.

The Taiwanese public has an average income of over US$13,000 per year, but people are not able to enjoy a proportional public infrastructure. There is also a gap between the resources enjoyed by northern and southern Taiwan and between urban and rural areas. These are all results of the previous government's mindset, because it thought it would only be in Taiwan for a short while.

In the past the government was overzealous about economic growth and sacrificed living standards and ecological protection to achieve that.

Now we have to pay the price and switch to sustainable development. It will cost us a lot but it's all for the good of our posterity.

TT: How will you help Chen in the election?

Lu: The electorate in this election is divided into three groups: pan-blue supporters, pan-green supporters and the neutral voters.

Most neutrals voters are rational voters who are closely observing the blue and green camps. They are the key to winning the election.

This is a positive trend -- the trend that Taiwan is developing, that is, the merging of independence and unification ideologies and embracing the neutral voters together, guided by the basis of rationality. The neutral voters have generated a certain impact on the election.

The pan-blue camp has given up its traditional ideology in order to grab the neutral voter market. It has embraced referendums and some other issues which it considered monsters in the past and is moving toward the DPP's position.

This result has been influenced by the neutral voters, and it's this rational force that forces the conservative pan-blue power to transform itself. It also liberates Taiwan.

This is Taiwan's political earthquake -- the freeing of political parties and ideologies. This is victory for the Taiwanese people.

This force is driving the political parties and elections away from a splitting of society and creating hatred between ethnic groups. Everyone is competing on a rational basis and this can all be attributed to this next election.

In the last election, Lien and Soong together grabbed nearly 60 percent of the votes, and Chen and Lu ticket only got 40 percent. This election will depend on whether the DPP administration has gained the support of the 20 percent of neutral voters after four years of effort.

Basically, I am discreetly positive about winning the election.

Strong personality the making of Lu

By Lin Chieh-yu and Debby Wu

STAFF REPORTERS

Sunday, Dec 14, 2003,Page 3

Vice President Annette Lu doesn't think that Taiwan will be ready to have a woman president in 2008, but in any case, she says she isn't planning on seeking the job.

"I doubt whether Taiwan will have its first female president by 2008 because I doubt whether Taiwanese society will be so advanced by then. The 2008 presidential election has nothing to do with me. Let others take the challenge. I'll be too tired by then," Lu told the Taipei Times in an interview on Friday.

"The experience of being the vice president from 2000 to now has left my body covered with wounds," she said.

"I wasn't on the alert against some media and politicians who attacked and criticized me. The entire society had doubts and showed that it was ill-suited to a female vice president. It was full of hostility," she said.

As the highest profile female politician in Taiwanese history, Lu's next step is a hot topic in the media. Many people do think she has her eye on the presidency.

Lu intentionally adopted a low-key attitude regarding the debate over whether she would be nominated to run as President Chen Shui-bian's running mate again, but she still showed strong dissatisfaction with the state of Taiwanese politics.

When Chen announced on Thursday that he was teaming up with Lu again, many Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators said it was a day of national mourn-ing, and several senior members of the party said they would be "participating in the campaign with tears in our eyes."

Just one month earlier, more than one-third of the DPP legislators signed a petition seeking to block Chen from nominating Lu as his running mate. A week before the nomination, two key pro-independence figures said four times in public that they were worried about Lu's "political ambition."

The strong criticism can be blamed on Lu's high level of self-confidence, her vision of herself as a political pioneer, her willingness to forge ahead on a policy no matter what other people say and her unwillingness to be regulated by the party.

No matter how great the opposition is, Lu has rarely been stopped from getting what she wants.

Those who opposes Lu criticizes her as "too outspoken, arbitrary, ambitious and inflexible," but her supporters see her as "knowledgeable, determined, seasoned in international affairs and equipped with a futuristic vision."

Her opponents have rarely been able to defeat Lu in political struggles, but over the years she has shown a talent for alienating supporters.

Long-term ally is not a phrase that is often heard in connection with Lu.

"Since I entered politics, I have participated in elections five times and won all five," Lu has often reminded reporters.

Her election record is an outstanding one in Taiwan -- but what is rarely mentioned is that her victories were based on the support of five different camps. Each time she has fallen out with her old supporters before the next election rolled around.

Lu's political career dates back to the breaking of diplomatic relations between Taiwan and the US in 1978. She chose to end her stint as a student at Harvard University and returned to Taiwan to join the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government and take charge of Cabinet work related to young people.

She devoted herself to women's movement, and started to move in the circles of dissidents promoting democracy and reform. She eventually changed from a KMT-raised Taiwanese elite to a dissident.

"Her talents and extensive knowledge enabled her to use concise and precise language with rich supporting materials. This is an ability gained by the combination of natural gifts and hard work," National Security Council Secretary-General Kang Ning-hsiang, a leader of the democratic movement in 1980s, once said in praise of Lu.

DPP leaders all admit that even though Chen's public speeches are unrivalled in manipulating public sentiments, he still cannot be compared to Lu's vision.

"Annette Lu does not need anyone to polish her speech text for her. She can always elaborate on any topics with precise and strong language," said Chen Sung-shan, Civil Service Commissioner and the director of Chen's legislative office during his time as a lawmaker.

Lu devoted almost 25 years to the democratic movement, and she was jailed for four-and-a-half years. She could not even attend her mother's funeral.

She is still single and says she has little private time. She says she is always thinking about Taiwan's next move.

Now that the Chen-Lu ticket has been confirmed, what concerns Lu is not the DPP's campaign strategy nor its organization, but the Democratic Pacific Union, a international non-governmental organization she is helping to form.

Lu's acceptance speech after her nomination was about humans' sustainable existence, population, the environment, internationalization and globalization.

Her opponents said that she was being anachronistic, but her supporters knew very clearly that it was Lu's pronouncement that she had already set her sights on what she would do after 2008 -- if she and Chen win re-election next year.

China's missiles threaten status quo

While US President George W. has taken Taiwan to task for plans to hold a referendum on China's military intimidation, he appears to have forgotten that the true threat to peace comes from Taiwan's totalitarian neighbor

Taiwan has never seen an election race as tight as this one. With four major campaign platforms -- strengthening democratization, rectifying the name of Taiwan, upholding referendum rights and writing a new constitution -- the DPP is giving Taiwan's people a wake-up call with regard to national identity.

The KMT condemns President Chen Shui-bian for committing "treason" with such platforms, yet reiterates the "one China" principle for a stable society and prosperous economy as the theme of its campaign. This is a debate over history, national identity, democracy and the recognition of Taiwan's independence from China.

The so-called debate over history is over the issue of whether Taiwan belongs to China. The people of Taiwan have been under the rule of the Dutch and Spanish, beginning about 10 generations ago, until the Ching Dynasty ceded Taiwan permanently to Japan. Japan then ruled Taiwan for 50 years.

It is the perception of the Taiwanese people with a nativization consciousness that the real political bondage of Taiwan began on Oct. 17, 1945. After Japan's defeat in World War II, the Chinese National Party (KMT) government sailed to Taiwan on US naval vessels, protected by accompanying US carriers, and then landed at Keelung. With the consent of the top military commander of the US in Far East, the Japanese armed forces in Taiwan surrendered to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石). The KMT government was given the legal authority to temporarily occupy Taiwan.

In 1949, the Chinese Communist Party took over China, declaring the establishment of the People's Republic of China (PRC) with Beijing as the capital. In December of that same year, Chiang declared Taipei as the temporary capital of the ROC government headed by the KMT. On June 27, 1950, the US president declared that the action of the US navy in sailing into Taiwanese waters and engaging in military attacks violated the UN Charter.

San Francisco treaty

During this time, the Allies and Japan negotiated a peace treaty. Neither the KMT in Taiwan nor the communists in Beijing were invited to take part in the peace conference in San Francisco in 1950. The peace treaty resulting from the conference stated that Japan officially relinquished sovereignty over Taiwan and Penghu. However, nothing was said about officially transferring that sovereignty to either the KMT government or the Chinese communist government. In 1949, Chiang Kai-shek simply accepted the surrender of the Japanese forces in Taiwan on the behalf of the Allies. Moreover, in 1950, the US president also declared that the determination of the future status of Taiwan must await restoration of peace in the Pacific or a decision by the UN. So, the sovereignty issue of Taiwan remained undecided. It is an indisputable fact about the legal status of Taiwan.

The myth embraced by the PRC -- that Taiwan is part of China -- is a lie. The PRC has not ruled Taiwan for one day. It is not uncommon for China to make this kind of lie. A more recent example, when SARS was spreading to Taiwan and other parts of the world, Beijing lied to the World Health Organization (WHO) that it had already established mechanisms and channels to help Taiwan prevent the spread of the epidemic.

The PRC accepts neither "one China and one Taiwan" nor "two Chinas." In other words, to the PRC, the Republic of China no longer exists. On the other hand, the ROC on Taiwan is not recognized by the international community. The UN and the Allies never did resolve Taiwan's status. Only the people of Taiwan can decide for themselves whether Taiwan is independent from China.

Today, the KMT continues to hold on to the outdated "sacred tablet" of the ROC, believing that this will keep China from attacking Taiwan. But, can doing so truly bring permanent peace and stability to Taiwan? While KMT Chairman Lien Chan and PFP Chairman James Soong have teamed up to run for president and vice president of the ROC, they deny the fact that the legal status of Taiwan remains undetermined. They see acceptance of the "one country, two systems" model used for Hong Kong as a necessary price to pay for stability. Before 2000, the KMT's rule of Taiwan must be deemed a temporary authorization or entrustment by the Allies or the UN, since the PRC has extinguished the ROC -- the government the KMT supposedly headed. For this reason, former president Lee Teng-hui saw the KMT as an alien regime.

During the 50 years that the KMT ruled Taiwan, martial law was used during the first 38 years to oppress the Taiwanese people. In the remaining 13 years of its rule, under international pressure, the foundations for democracy and economic development were installed. Chen's election in 2000 meant the end of the entrustment to the KMT. Taiwan is already independent from China.

After his election, Chen declared human rights protection as a fundamental ideal of the country. Consistent with such ideals, the UN should accept the sovereign legal status of Taiwan, and allow the people of Taiwan to proclaim through a democratic manner that Taiwan is independent from China.

The people of Taiwan have decided, in place of the UN and the Allies, their own future and the status of their country. The international community and the UN must recognize Taiwan as a UN member, so as to live up to their principles of humanitarian, peaceful and lawful transfer of power. The US and Japan should also support and recognize the fact that the people of Taiwan have already established a democratic country.

During its rule, the KMT imposed one-party totalitarianism and trampled on human rights. To win the upcoming election, Lien has already confessed these mistakes and made an apology on the behalf of the KMT to the people of Taiwan. Its human rights violations during its military dictatorship and the illegal seizure of assets and properties of the people and the country have made the KMT the richest political party in the world. Moreover, it continues to use this wealth to run the party and buy votes. The assassination of political dissidents during the martial law era has torn apart countless numbers of families and created many more tragedies. The 228 Incident, the Kaohsiung Incident, and the murders of Lin Yi-hsiung's family and Chen Wen-cheng have all become road blocks to the election campaign of Lien and Soong.

Running under the banner of the "Chinese" Nationalist Party is no different from running on behalf of the PRC, since Lien accepts the "one China" principle and Soong "one country, two systems." This is unforgivable given that, while standing next to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao made severe verbal assaults against Taiwan, saying, "It is impermissible for Taiwan to attempt to split from China under the disguise of democracy." China is also trying to intimidate Taiwan from holding a referendum with the deployment of 496 missiles targeting the country.

obstructionist KMT

As a result of its election defeat in 2000, the KMT became the opposition party, losing executive power yet still holding a legislative majority. In spite of this, the KMT has shown no respect to the president. It has impeded Chen from implementing reforms, constitutional change and democratization. It has taken every opportunity to boycott Chen, and vetoed all efforts to place power in the hands of the people. Akin to the Chinese government, which has no concept of human rights, the KMT continues to give power priority over human rights, saying no to the human rights bill and the proposal to rewrite the constitution. After paralyzing Chen in terms of policy implementation and reforms, they then tease Chen for being incompetent.

Although Chen was popularly elected, the KMT and PFP together hold more than 50 percent of the seats in the legislature. They joined forces in denying the president his powers, as well as verbally attacking him and refusing to work with him. Instead of accepting the change of ruling power pursuant to a democratic mechanism,they resist the DPP, seeing it as taking away and robbing them of their powers. The pan-blue camp is opposing Chen for the sake of opposing him and resorting to sabotage and insults to lessen Chen's chance of re-election.

The central campaign platform of Chen is "one country on each side" of the Taiwan Strait, incorporating referendum rights into the constitution and economic development. His platform has the support of the public, adding points to his election campaign. Chen understands the popular will and the fact that Taiwan has a bad neighbor on the other side of the Taiwan Strait who is waiting day and night for a chance to engulf Taiwan.

The stability of the cross-strait relationship is tied to the two red lines drawn by the US -- no Taiwan independence and no use of force by China. These conditions are set to maintain peace. However, they have given China the upper hand. While China may not have actually used force yet, it is eagerly building up its arms, putting Taiwan in a disadvantageous position. The US can always keep Taiwan from declaring independence, but it is doubtful whether it can always restrain China from using force against Taiwan.

In view of this, Chen seeks to conduct a defensive referendum to maintain a balance of power between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. The intention is to say "no" through a democratic mechanism to China's unreasonable demand of "one country, two systems." Chen's appeal is consistent with the human right ideals of the country and has won the recognition of moderate voters, increasing the popular support of the DPP by about 8 percent.

The US hopes cross-strait dialogue can maintain peace in the Taiwan Strait. This is an impossible dream. China has already set acceptance of the "one China" principle, under which Taiwan would be colonized in the manner of Hong Kong, as a precondition for such dialogue.

The preamble of China's constitution already states that Taiwan is part of China. Once dialogue begins, the sovereign status of Taiwan would soon be lost. According to the UN Charter, human rights and peace depend on self-determination. A nationwide referendum supervised by the UN Security Council is the only way to preserve the dignity of Taiwan's people and the legal sovereign status of Taiwan, as well as to leave behind the ambiguous "one China" principle. Of course, Taiwan is not in a position to accomplish this without the support of the US, Japan and the EU.

new constitution

To leave behind authoritarian politics, implement the human rights ideals of the country, rectify the name of the country and strengthen the quality of Taiwan's democracy, we must incorporate referendums into a new constitution.

Why does Taiwan need a new constitution? Taiwan is still using a constitution drafted in 1949 in China. The Constitution does not meet the demands and needs of contemporary Taiwan. A constitution drafted more than 50 years ago in another country is ill-suited for Taiwan's democracy. Even the PRC sees the Constitution as waste paper. While efforts were made to amend the Constitution beginning 1987, it is beyond salvaging or adaptation to Taiwan's development. These amendments created the malfunctions in many political mechanisms, leading to ethnic rivalry and political division.

During his meeting with Wen, US President George W. Bush indicated disapproval of Taiwan's move to hold a defensive referendum, which was interpreted by many as hindering further democratization of Taiwan. If reforms and changes are forbidden, the Chen government will immediately become paralyzed. That is what happened over the past three years, with the KMT boycotting Chen's constitutional and political reforms. The US is seemingly helping out Soong and Lien, keeping Chen from re-election.

Political reforms and constitutional reforms are internal issues of Taiwan. The roots of Taiwan's democracy have begun to rot. Chen believes he is able to win the March presidential election because the political and constitutional reforms he advocates will stabilize the internal structural conflicts and contradictions of Taiwan, as well as meet the expectations of the younger generations of voters. The bombshell dropped by Bush in his talk with Wen has damaged Chen's campaign.

The US cannot stop and keep democracy in Taiwan from progressing and moving forward. There is nothing China dislikes more than development of democracy in Taiwan. What is the purpose of prohibiting a change in the status quo? If Taiwan can't even engage in internal reforms and democratic reforms, how can democracy and human rights continue in thrive in Taiwan? The imposition of such a demand on Taiwan will tilt the balance of power in the Taiwan Strait, suggesting that the US may be paving the way for Chin to colonize Taiwan

Chen has proposed a defensive referendum and demanded the withdrawal of Chinese missiles. "One country two systems" is China's way of engulfing Taiwan, dwarfing Taiwan and demolishing democracy, which will revive totalitarianism in Taiwan and turn the country into another Hong Kong. The positions of Soong and Lien seem to support such a development. Accepting "one country, two systems" is the equivalent of selling out Taiwan's human rights and democratic values.

Taiwan should insist on expressing the popular will through a democratically conducted referendum. This is a most democratic way to make a point. Moreover, China is not exactly maintaining the status quo. With 496 missiles armed at Taiwan, the US surely understands the threats to security, stability and peace in Taiwan. The EU has long asked that China withdraw the missiles. Yet the US is turning a blind eye to this egregious disruption of the status quo.