A I T on June 18, 2004

US review only partial, official says

`ONE CHINA' POLICY: The chairman of the US-China Economic Security Review Commission says wholesale change is not needed, but that a review should take into account changes in the status quo

By Charles Snyder
STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON
 

The US should not engage in a wholesale change of its "one China" policy but should review only those "component parts" affected by China's recent military buildup and other developments in China and Taiwan, the chairman of a congressional panel that called for a review of the policy said Wednesday.

Roger Robinson, the chairman of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, made his comments in testimony before a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the commission's latest annual report to Congress.

"We don't mean that any kind of wholesale change is in order," Robinson said.

"Rather, [we recommended] looking within the `one China' policy as it exists today and determining whether we're providing sufficient defense-related assistance to Taiwan at the pace needed to keep up with the Chinese [arms] buildup," he said.

He also said the review suggested by his commission was aimed at "helping Taiwan break out of the political and economic isolation that Beijing has been trying to enforce against it."

His statements helped clarify what the commission meant when it recommended, in its annual report to Congress issued Tuesday, that lawmakers and the administration review the "one China" policy in light of changes since the policy was first adopted.

Robinson stressed that the commission did not "necessarily try to prejudge the outcome" of such a review.

"We are not suggesting that the policy has not served to keep the peace for 25 years," he said.

Robinson's comments appeared to be in response to the heated reaction that met the report's call for a review of the "one China" policy.

"We believe that in the 25 years since the `one China' policy was implemented, what was called the status quo has changed significantly on the ground, and what might have been the status quo then is no longer the status quo," he said. "It is entirely possible that the `one China' policy will continue to be effective, but we feel it is time for Congress and the administration to look at this and determine if it's going to continue to work, or if it's making things more dangerous for us."

Robinson was referring to the commitment Washington made in the Taiwan Relations Act to supply Taiwan with defensive weapons and to prepare to respond to any hostile act against Taiwan by China.

"There is a serious and even perilous imbalance in military capabilities in cross-strait relations," he said.

China is "clearly not only preparing for the eventuality of a forceful unification scenario, but also and even more disturbingly the interdiction of US forces that might seek to intervene."

The most disturbing aspect of this is the potential for miscalculation, he said, noting that China has purchased submarine-based cruise missiles that could be launched against an American aircraft carrier home to 5,000 troops.

"If such a missile let fly, it would be a national catastrophe and crisis," he said.

"The change of America being enmeshed in this conflict is so big that we simply cannot stand on the sidelines to see any downward spiral in cross-strait relations. That was what the commission was getting at when we talked about the `one China' policy," Robinson said.

He did not explain that comment.

The commission chairman also called for the release by the US government of any documents that remain secret that contain additional commitments to Taiwan made by various presidents over the past half century.

He cited one document he had heard of from then-president Ronald Reagan at the time of the signing of the April 17, 1982, Third Communique. He paraphrased the document as saying that the US would try to ensure "that any change in the military balance would not work to the disadvantage of Taiwan unduly, and that, in effect, we would step up to whatever challenge we would face if this imbalance became too draconian or lopsided."

He said the release of such secret documents would help the commission in its deliberations as US-Taiwan relations "become more perilous and complex."

Chen to thank former AIT boss

GOODWILL: Therese Shaheen was, perhaps, a little too pro-Taiwan for some in the US and the AIT, and the Presidential Office will effusively thank her for it on Monday

By Lin Chieh-yu
STAFF REPORTER
 

Former American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) chairwoman Therese Shaheen will arrive in Taiwan tomorrow on a five-day trip, during which the government will express its appreciation for her prominent role in facilitating ties with the US.

"President Chen Shui-bian will receive Shaheen and honor her with a decoration," a source at the Presidential Office said yesterday. "We are also preparing a banquet to welcome Shaheen at the Presidential Office at noon on Monday."

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and friends of Shaheen helped to arrange her schedule, which will include meeting business leaders and participating in the Dragon Boat Festival. She will leave the country on the following day.

A close aide to Chen said that decorating Shaheen was an expression of the government's sincere appreciation for her contribution to the promotion of the country.

But Shaheen's arrival will also serve as a reminder of tensions between the current AIT leadership and Taiwan's government.

In contrast to some US officials in charge of Taiwan affairs, the official said, in a veiled reference to AIT director Douglas Paal, Shaheen was a very good friend of this country who sincerely devoted herself to promoting US-Taiwan friendship.

"During President Chen's stopover in cities in the US last October, he and his entire delegation enjoyed high-profile treatment thanks to Shaheen's endorsement and support, which resulted in breakthroughs in the US-Taiwan relationship," the official said.

During Chen's three-day stop-over in New York, Shaheen praised his achievement in furthering democracy and human rights, calling Chen a "superstar."

She also described US President George W. Bush as a "secret guardian angel."

"And while Washington hesitated to issue a formal congratulatory message to Chen after winning the March 20 presidential election, Shaheen clearly expressed her congratulations to Chen," the official said.

Another high-ranking official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Shaheen did something that many other US officials were unwilling to do, which was to stand up and support Taiwan in a time of need.

"Other leaders at the AIT were choosing to meet with the opposition parties' presidential candidates straight after the election. They were also making strong remarks which were inappropriate from a diplomatic point of view that interfered with government policy," the official said.

"Shaheen's congratulations and her genuine concern for our two countries' relationship should be cherished. She deserves much gratitude," the government official told the Taipei Times.

"Shaheen's sincerity and goodwill toward Taiwan might have ultimately harmed her political career, but in the process she earned our eternal respect," the official said.

Shaheen took office on December 2002. She resigned in April, saying she wanted to spend more time with her daughter.

Taipei's political circles recognized, however, that her resignation was the result of political wrangling in Washington.

The Presidential Office had invited Shaheen to attend Chen's inauguration ceremony on May 20, but she turned it down, claiming family commitments.

"We understand that she was keeping in mind the need not to embarrass the US government," a ministry official said.

As to whether Shaheen will meet with any AIT officials in Taiwan during her five-day trip, Nadine Siak, information officer at the AIT's Public Affairs Section, told the Taipei Times that the AIT had not made any arrangements for Shaheen because she is a private individual.

China puts off torture inspections

ABUSES: Beijing has put yet another roadblock in the way of planned UN inspections that would investigate reports that torture is routine in China

AP , SHANGHAI
 

China has postponed a visit by the UN special investigator on torture, saying it needs more time to prepare, an official said yesterday.

Theo van Boven had planned to visit later this month to investigate reports of abuses in Chinese jails, but the visit has been put off until later this year, van Boven said in a statement.

Rights groups say Chinese police and security services commonly use torture as punishment and to obtain confessions or information. China routinely denies the charges.

"The need for additional time to prepare for the two-week visit, especially given the different authorities, departments and provinces involved, was cited by the government as a reason for the postponement," a statement on van Boven's Web site said.

The UN has tried for almost a decade to arrange the inspector's visit, but China's government has repeatedly stalled on granting permission.

Human-rights groups say China has been unwilling to accept the terms of a visit, which include measures such as allowing unlimited access to prisons without prior notice and confidential interviews with detainees and representatives of civic groups.

However, van Boven said China had accepted his conditions as part of its invitation issued last November.

China's Foreign Ministry had no immediate comment on the postponement.

A report by the Xinhua News Agency quoted van Boven's statement and said such invitations were part of China's commitment to the international community. The report defended the government's human-rights record, saying its efforts to improve human rights among Chinese had "won appreciation from the international community."

Van Boven's statement said his visit's goal was to "assess first-hand the situation in the country concerning torture, including institutional and legislative factors that contribute to such practices.

"While a visit to China has been long-awaited ... he is assured that the need for further preparation indicates the importance the Government attaches to the visit," the statement added.

Human-rights groups claim detainees, including those perceived as political opponents of the ruling Communist Party, face regular abuse in China.

The banned spiritual movement Falun Gong says its practitioners have been tortured and killed by the hundreds in Chinese prisons and labor camps.

A New York-based group, Human Rights in China, expressed disappointment over the postponement of the inspector's visit. Beijing appeared to have made the invitation to deflect criticism, only to abandon it once international pressure had lessened, the group said.

"This eleventh-hour postponement raises serious questions about the sincerity of the [Chinese] government's commitment to international cooperation," the group said in a news release

A boost to Taiwan's morale

The year 2009 will be an important one for Taiwan for gaining international recognition, for Kaohsiung City will host the Eighth World Games and Taipei City will host the 21st Deaflympic Games. Regardless of the outcome of the games, the fact that Taiwan will host two international sporting events will be a morale booster for the people of Taiwan.

Apart from the 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles, almost every country hosting the Olympic Games has lost money. Despite this, countries are doing everything in their power to win the right to host the games. The reason for this is that hosting an international sporting event will improve the country's international name recognition, bring the nation together and improve the level of athletics. These things are all more important than money.

Hosting these events is far more significant for Taiwan than it would be for other countries. Taiwan has always been pushed aside in the international arena by China.

Once it was pushed off the international agenda altogether, Taiwan could no longer participate in international athletic events until 1981, when it signed the Lausanne Agreement and once again was welcomed to participate in such events, now under the name "Chinese Taipei." From that time on, five attempts by Taiwan to win the right to host an international sports event have failed due to Chinese pressure: the Asian Games in 1998 and 2002, the World University Games in 2001 and 2007 and the East Asian Games in 2009.

In 1995, Kaohsiung was well on the way to winning its bid to host the 2002 Asian Games. At the time its position was much stronger than that of its closest rival Busan, South Korea, but Kaohsiung lost the bid after Beijing used its influence. In 1997, Kaohsiung bid to host the 2001 World Games. The front runner in this race was the city of Daegu, South Korea. Unable to pay the US$5 million donation because of a financial crisis, Daegu was forced to drop its bid. With Daegu out of the race, the nomination should have gone to Kaohsiung, but at the last minute, China entered the race, depriving Kaohsiung of the prize. Last year, Tainan and Kaohsiung jointly bid for the 2007 World Games. China, unable to bid again, having hosted the event in 2001, put its support behind Bangkok, which led to yet another bitter defeat for Taiwan. Taiwan's success in winning the bid for the 2009 World Games has enormous significance.

The fact that Taiwan will be playing host to two international sporting events represents a degree of acceptance and recognition from the international community. This is especially the case as Beijing will be hosting the 2008 Olympics and Shanghai will host the World EXPO in 2010, which increases the international pressure that China can bring to bear on Taiwan. This makes it all the more important that we are hosting two important sporting events in 2009, which balances things out internationally.

Taiwan's space on the international stage has been gradually eroded by China, and after battling for many years we have finally won the right to host the World Games. The joy and sorrow that attends this success is not easily understood by people outside Taiwan. All Taiwanese should cherish this hard earned opportunity and give a cheer for Kaohsiung's success.

A cross-strait task force is needed

By Nat Bellocchi

Now that the tensions of late last year and early this year have been mitigated somewhat, perhaps it is easier to ponder why tensions had been raised, and what might be done to avoid such problems. President Chen Shui-bian's efforts to improve cross-strait relations in his first two years in office had no results. The economic recession, especially the high rate of unemployment, was improving, but slowly, and the opposition-led Legislative Yuan had thwarted stimulus and reform generally. In addition a coalition between the two opposition parties had been formed. Prospects for a second term of a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government were uncertain at best. It seems clear that a decision was made to turn tough on the China relationship in preparing for the next election.

In Washington, the government, at least in public, had maintained a strict neutrality on the forthcoming election in Taiwan. Information and analysis received there is not publicly known, of course, but most of the China experts in the think tanks saw this "get tough" strategy as purely an election gambit, irresponsible, placing the US at risk of possible military action. They were certain that the eventual objective was independence. Words such as "moving toward independence," and that Chen was "untrustworthy," among other statements often used by China, were heard.

That there were also other very legitimate and very fundamental reasons for Chen's strategy did not seem to be explored. A referendum, for example, for the DPP was clearly a fundamental necessity. Even more important, the leadership saw some "re-engineering" of the Constitution by making fundamental changes was vital to continuing the populist democracy they now have.

So the Taiwan side saw this framework, while the US understandably saw this as an unacceptable risk for America. One could ask, why was this not discussed before it became a problem? Perhaps in some fashion it was.

On the US side, the tension eventually generated an important policy statement. Henceforth the US would involve itself more closely with changes in Taiwan's domestic political reform. In doing so, it will define what provocation is, what the status quo is, and what moves are going in the wrong direction.

This brings many questions, including very importantly, China's reactions to any of this. How the US will involve itself on domestic political issues being debated in a democracy by directly elected officials, is another. There is within this problem a legitimate element of interest by the US, as its commitments on Taiwan's security (and its less stated position on Taiwan's sovereignty), present rather important risks for the US. At the same time, however, any legitimate reform will inevitably be cast in the cross-strait context and opposed by China.

However this US policy evolves, it will be delicate to say the least. That means a better system of communicating with each other. It is in the US and Taiwan's interest and that of stability in East Asia, that there is continuous attention at senior levels to discover and address potential problems that could possibly quickly get out of control.

In the US, national security policy revolves around the State Department, the Department of Defense and the National Security Council, in various degrees of coordination. In Taiwan, the President's office and various advisors seem to make policy while the institutions of national security remain relatively uninvolved.

For the US-Taiwan relationship, especially on national security matters in the US, a cross-strait Task Group, made up of deputy assistant secretaries or their equivalent from say, the State Department, Defense Department, and the National Security Council could be tasked with producing a report to the president or a designated senior official chosen by him. The report would be based on a regular quarterly meeting of this group with their Taiwan counterparts, and would include recommendations on any action that should be addressed.

The Taiwanese side would be expected to have a similar process to assure the president or his designated senior officer would be equally informed. There is a need for the Presidential Office on both sides to be kept informed as the relationship is not only important for foreign affairs but also domestic affairs.

Taking into account the style and preferences of the two leaders -- US President George W. Bush and Chen -- a channel to discuss such matters at a level in government high enough to be heard internally by the leadership in each country -- a channel that would be acceptable to the two leaders -- is needed. But it also needs the filtering of these discussions, by the deputy assistant secretary or equivalent level officials who are close to the experts in the bureaucracy.

If one ponders the possible communications process noted above, and the events that unfolded late last year and early this year, actions that took too much time to understand might have been understood soon enough to compromise and keep unnecessary tensions from developing. Determining how to address legitimate democratic domestic developments in Taiwan, while also protecting American interests, is a formidable challenge. It doesn't need misunderstanding to make it more difficult.

Nat Bellocchi is the former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and is now a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.

No more golden eggs for China?

By Huang Tien-lin
 

In a follow-up to the stern statement China's Taiwan Affairs Office issued on May 24 that Beijing "does not welcome Taiwanese business people making money in China only to return to Taiwan to support Taiwanese independence," the People's Daily ran an article on its front page on May 31 criticizing Chi Mei Group founder Hsu Wen-lung . Three days later, early in the morning of June 6, the China Internet Information Center published an article written by a Chinese academic entitled "The possibility of mainland economic sanctions against Taiwan cannot be excluded."

Is China really preparing to put the screws on Taiwanese businessmen, or even to place Taiwan under an economic blockade? I don't think so. We should stay calm. China's attempt to achieve unification through economic means has not yet been accomplished, nor has China completely drained the country -- Taiwan still possesses capital, technology and outstanding industries, something China lacks.

Some people say that even if Taiwanese companies do not go to China, China will sooner or later obtain these technologies, capital and industries from other countries.

In the end, the issue is not that simple, because foreign manufacturers are not as magnanimous and generous as Taiwanese manufacturers, who, holding nothing back, provide China with the technologies and management skills she wants. Therefore, if China wants to develop a new industry with the help of some other foreign manufacturers, it will take much longer than if they had been relying on Taiwanese companies.

The wafer industry is one obvious example. China has implemented two consecutive five-year plans, the 908 and the 909 plans, aimed at developing its semiconductor industry. The 909 plan brought together well-known foreign semiconductor manufacturers, typified by Huahong NEC Electronics, a joint venture with NEC and Motorola's Tianjin plant, but all to no avail. China in the end only managed a breakthrough and subsequent take-off with the help of SMIC, a company that had left Taiwan.

China is now trying to invest in and develop its thin-film-transistor liquid crystal display industry together with NEC. Whether this joint venture will end up the same way as Huahong NEC did, with China looking to Taiwanese businessmen for help, remains to be seen. In other words, Taiwanese businesses remain China's first choice. As long as Taiwan possesses an industry China wants, Beijing will not kill the goose [Taiwanese businesspeople] that lays the golden eggs.

So, does this all mean that China will not impose economic sanctions against Taiwan? The answer would have to be that they absolutely will, it's just that the time is not yet ripe. In the event that Taiwan can no longer offer China things that it requires, or if China has already reached the point of satiation regarding these items, Beijing will show no hesitation in putting the screws on pro-green Taiwanese businesses and then on Taiwanese businesses in general.

Beijing will require them to make their allegiances known, and those that express loyalty to the idea of Taiwanese independence will be given a final ultimatum. After all, all of their capital is in China, and it can be taken away if need be. By that time, the Taiwanese economy will already be considerably weakened and fragile, and finance and the stock market will be in turmoil. China's grand project of achieving unification through economic means would thus have been completed.

China's three-pronged plan against Taiwan (that is, the Taiwan Affairs Office's criticism of pro-green businesses, the media attack on Hsu and the threat of economic sanctions) are certainly not policies improvised on the fly. To have arrived at this point they must have already gone through detailed evaluations and drills. Given that they have been able to intimidate pro-green Taiwanese businesses without adversely affecting Taiwanese investment in China, and have also increased the proportion of Taiwanese businesses seeing things their way, one could say that Beijing has managed to kill three birds with one stone.

And what is left for Taiwan in all this? Will we meekly accept humiliations and make concessions to save the situation, thus setting ourselves up for a death blow? In the aftermath of the attack on pro-green businesses by the Taiwan Affairs Office, the government should keep a watchful eye on the weaker side of human nature in businessmen, and take note of the droves of Taiwanese bosses going over to China, taking with them millions, or even billions of Taiwanese dollars in investment.

If they don't recognize the tell-tale signs here and fail to amend their consistent policy of economic development in China, the time when China will be levying these economic sanctions against Taiwan will not be far off. The more Taiwanese businesses go over to China, the sooner the time that Beijing is waiting for will be upon us!

Huang Tien-lin is a national policy adviser to the president.