China harassing Taiwan at every turn, MAC says

By Joy Su, STAFF REPORTER

China has been taking its opposition to Taiwan's international participation beyond the realm of politics, exerting pressure even at a venue as distinctly apolitical as a hairdressers' competition in Milan, the nation's primary cross-strait policymaking body said yesterday.

"In addition to blocking Taiwanese participation in international organizations, China has come down hard on international activities and events that are not political in nature. This will only cause Taiwanese people's hearts to become more and more distant [from China]," Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Joseph Wu said yesterday while receiving Ruediger Moniac, the editor-in-chief of the German monthly publication Loyalty.

In a statement the council released yesterday afternoon, Wu highlighted as an example the difficulties Taiwanese competitors had run into while participating in a competition hosted by the World Hairdressers' Organization.

When Taiwanese delegation head Chen Te-hsiung asked that the delegation be referred to as "Taiwan" instead of "Chinese Taipei" during the biennial "Hairworld 2004" last month, the Chinese representative insisted that Taiwan was a part of China.

Wu also took the opportunity to plead for caution on lifting the EU arms embargo against China, which some in Europe have proposed.

"China's human rights record is far from stellar, and China has continued to stick by its threats to use military force against Taiwan," Wu said. "As such, the EU should use caution in its handling of the arms embargo so that China does not misinterpret the move as support for the use of military aggression in dealing with Taiwan."

Wu returned last week from a low-profile visit to Europe.

Asked whether there had been interaction between military personnel across the Taiwan Strait, Wu said that Taiwan has repeatedly expressed a willingness to cooperate, but has yet to get a positive response from China.

"Taiwan has already raised the possibility of establishing confidence-building measures across the Strait in order to avoid inadvertent military conflicts," Wu said. "However, China has not responded to this in affirmation. Instead, China has moved to modernize its weapons daily, investing a huge military budget into the improvement of its weapons. It has also aimed missiles at Taiwan ... This all amounts to a serious threat."

He also expressed gratitude towards the German federal parliament for its passing of a resolution, adopted late last month, opposing the lifting of the EU arms embargo against China. The resolution stipulates that the German government monitor China's progress on improving its human rights record and resolving regional conflicts peacefully as criteria for the decision to lift or maintain the arms embargo.

Reported on Dec. 1, 2004

Australians urged to renounce force

ASSURANCES: Southeast Asian leaders called upon Australia to accede to a pact that, among other things, renounces the use of force among member nations

AFP , VIENTIANE

Advertising  Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who was to meet Southeast Asian leaders yesterday, faced pressure to sign a non-aggression pact with the region to dispel concern about his policy of pre-emptive strikes.

Howard has riled Australia's neighbors with tough talk of possible pre-emptive strikes against terrorist bases overseas, widely interpreted to mean Indonesia, although this has repeatedly been denied by Canberra.

ASEAN calls for Howard to sign the deal have grown louder ahead of his debut at the 10-nation group's summit, where he wants to launch talks toward a free trade deal.

"We are encouraging Australia and New Zealand to join us to accede to the TAC [Treaty of Amity and Cooperation] which they have not yet done," Philippine Foreign Minister Alberto Romulo said late Monday.

"We think that it's high time that Australia gives it serious consideration," Thai foreign ministry spokesman Sihasak Phunketkeow said.

ASEAN, which largely sees Australia as closer to the West than Asia, wants assurances about Australia's intentions.

"The way Indonesia sees it, there can be no more efficient and effective way for Australia to dispel misperceptions some quarters may have of its intentions in Southeast Asia than to simply accede to the TAC," Indonesian foreign ministry spokesman Marty Natalegawa said at the weekend.

But Australia insists it is no threat.

"There's no question of attacking Asian nations. We are a threat to nobody," Defense Minister Robert Hill said in Sydney yesterday.

"We are a peace-loving country. We will protect Australians and Australian interests, but we are a threat to nobody. Asian countries know that as well," he said.

Islamic militants have twice targeted Australians or the country's interests in Indonesia in recent years, in the 2002 Bali bombings which killed 88 Australians and in the September bombing of the Australian embassy in Jakarta.

ASEAN officials stress accession to the non-aggression treaty -- which has been signed by seven countries outside of ASEAN, including China and India -- is not a precondition for free-trade talks.

The pact calls for signatories to commit to "non-interference in the internal affairs of one another," a "renunciation of the threat or use of force" and the settlement of disputes by "peaceful means."

Canberra says this would bar it from criticizing the domestic policies of ASEAN members, for example Myanmar's internationally reviled regime.

Howard insisted Monday the TAC issue remained separate from the trade deal.

"They are two separate issues so we shouldn't confuse the two and that has been made very clear," he said in Sydney.

Negotiations on the trade deal that were expected to be announced yesterday are scheduled to run for two years, after which Australia and New Zealand would then be formally linked with the ASEAN trade bloc during the 10 years to 2017.

The aim of the agreement is to double trade and investment by 2010. Two-way trade in goods and services between ASEAN and the two countries totalled US$34.5 billion and investments reached US$8.4 billion last year.

Their combined annual economic output of US$1.3 trillion is nearly as big as that of China's US$1.4 trillion last year.

ASEAN comprises Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard, center, takes an early morning power walk with advisors around the Victory Monument (in background) in Vientiane, Laos, yesterday.

US frets over plan for new constitution

PRIMARY INTERESTS: The US State Department spokesman said again that Taiwan must not change the status quo with its constitutional reform plan.
By Charles Snyder STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON

The US has cautioned President Chen Shui-bian to stick to his pledge not to include any moves toward independence in the new constitution he wants to put to a referendum in 2006.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher on Monday urged Chen to adhere to the so-called "four noes," which he enunciated in his 2000 inauguration address and reiterated in his second inauguration speech in May.

"I think our view as stated is that his pledges were very, very important and need to be respected," Boucher told his regular daily press briefing.

Boucher's statement came as China has expressed increasing concern in recent weeks over plans for the Constitution, which has become a major campaign issue in the Legislative Yuan elections.

China's state-controlled media has said that Chen is trying to lead up to a declaration of independence, perhaps through the referendum process, and has threatened that Beijing would use force if he went ahead with such a plan.

"Our primary interest," Boucher said, "is in maintaining stability across the Taiwan Strait, and the United States is opposed to any unilateral steps that would change the status quo."

"We are opposed to any referendum that would change Taiwan's status or move toward independence," he said.

The "four-noes" refer to Chen's promise not to declare independence, not change the official name of Taiwan from the Republic of China, not to add the state-to-state model of cross-strait relations to the Constitution, not to hold a referendum to change the status quo on independence or unification with China and not to abolish the National Unification Guidelines.

"We appreciate President Chen's pledge and his subsequent reaffirmations of it," Boucher said. "We take these reaffirmations and that pledge very seriously, particularly as they apply to this referendum on a new constitution. "

He also repeated Washington's urging that Beijing and Taipei engage in dialogue, and reiterated that the Bush administration does not support Taiwan independence.

Boucher's comments came hours after news reports quoted former Chinese foreign minister Tang Jiaxuan as warning that Chen's plan to write a new constitution could precipitate a crisis that could lead to armed conflict if the new constitution includes wording that alludes to the country as a national territory.

The Washington Times reported that Tang told a group of foreign reporters in Beijing that Chen wants to create "an atmosphere and propaganda" for Taiwan's independence. Tang expressed suspicion that Chen might use the Constitution to provoke a confrontation in advance of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, under the assumption that China would not attack Taiwan just before the games.

Chen Shui-bian says he will stick to his `four noes' promise

By Huang Tai-lin, STAFF REPORTER  

President Chen Shui-bian  reaffirmed yesterday that he will uphold the pledges he made in his inaugural speech this year and Oct. 10 National Day address.

Chen's remarks came in reaction to a statement made by US State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher on Monday, who cautioned Taiwan against holding a referendum to seek independence.

"I am representing the government, and reaffirm that all the pledges I made during the May 20 inaugural speech, the National Day address on Oct. 10 and the `10 points' speech after the national security meeting still stand," Chen said while receiving visiting US congressmembers John Culberson, a Texas Republican; John Carter, also a Texas Rebublican; and Phil Gingrey, a Georgia Republican, at the Presidential Office.

Chen promised in his inaugural speech this year that he would not declare independence, not change the name of Taiwan's government, not to add the state-to-state model to the Constitution and not to promote a referendum to change the status quo.

The "10 points" speech after the national security meeting on Nov. 11 included a commitment to seek stability and peace across the Taiwan Strait.

"There have not been any changes so far, and will be none during the rest of my term in office," Chen added.

Last Saturday, Chen proposed holding of a referendum on a new constitution in 2006 and having it implemented in 2008, when his second term in office ends.

During the meeting with his US visitors yesterday, Chen stressed that he has no plans to change the status quo of Taiwan's relations with China through legal reform.

Chen said the formulation of the new constitution will proceed in accordance with the existing constitutional system, in which the plan must first obtain the approval of three-quarters of the Legislative Yuan before it can proceed to a referendum on drafting a new constitution.

One of the items in the proposed constitutional reform package passed by the Legislative Yuan on Aug. 23 stated that the National Assembly will be abolished, and after it is abolished, bills regarding constitutional amendments and territorial changes will need to be ratified by the public via referendum after being passed by the legislature.

Next year will be the last year that members of the National Assembly will be elected.

KMT must cut ties to party-state

By Hsu Yung-ming

 If President Chen Shui-bian has brought up the national emblem/party emblem issue as an election ploy, then this is probably only the beginning and the issue is unlikely to die down as rapidly as the Chinese National Party (KMT) might hope. In our daily lives there are already too many instances in which state and party are not clearly separated.

From the national flag, emblem, anthem and the general principles of the Constitution to military insignia, the administrative structure of the government and even the establishment of memorial halls, all of these are concrete reminders of the link between party and state. The question of KMT party assets and its ownership of China Television (CTV) and the Broadcasting Corporation of China (BCC) is relatively insignificant when seen beside these symbols of a political party's total control of a country's ideological framework.

What is really surprising is not how good the green camp has proved at campaigning, but that 10 years after the first direct presidential election and an interminable period of talking about democratic consolidation, we are still discussing an issue as fundamental as what the correct relationship between the state and the political party within a democratic system should be.

Put simply, the question is: Which is more important, party or state? Since it was the KMT that founded the Republic of China (ROC), it is not surprising that many of the fundamental principles and procedures of government have their source with that party. But now that the KMT is in opposition, these former advantages have simply become targets for attack.

We return to the unique characteristics of Taiwan's democracy. It started with the opening up of political office, with former presidents Chiang Ching-kuo and Lee Teng-hui directing the energies of opposition forces into electoral campaigning. For this reason, even though there was considerable debate within the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) over taking the path of elections or social activism, the party very rapidly developed into an election machine with a highly efficient system of nominations, accurate opinion polls and a group of outstanding people willing to stand for election.

These three factors have been responsible for the enormous electoral success of the DPP in recent years, and the possibility they may win a legislative majority in the elections next month.

As for the lawsuits related to the election results, the "soft coup d'etat" and the controversy over the national emblem and party emblem, all of these matters simply underline the KMT's attitude of being the nation's first and biggest party. Its attitude that it is more important than the nation is not only unhelpful to its electoral hopes, it also gives the impression that it is still a ruling party even when in opposition.

Despite being an opposition party, it seems to be even more conservative than the ruling party, and with all its advantages, it presents an even more appealing target for muckraking. Its ostentatiously splendid party headquarters is crowned with a huge party emblem (or is that a national emblem?). Chen sees this building and this emblem every day, and it is no wonder that he lost his temper.

It is not a question of political sophistication, but simply a matter of common sense.

As soon as the question of party and state is raised, the KMT loses its common sense, saying that criticizing the party emblem is a way of aggravating ethnic conflict. That the KMT sees Mainlander voters as their private property is one thing, but to make them bear the cross of the party emblem is too much, so it is hardly surprising that there are few voices that express sympathy for the KMT.

Those who have considered the matter more closely generally see cutting the umbilical cord that links party and state as the only way for the parties of the blue camp to survive. The party's reform committee of four years ago was unwilling to face up to this problem, and now they are stuck in a dilemma.

I recall taking a tour to Nanjing, where the first stop after disembarkation was the Nanjing Presidential Office, followed the next day by a trip to the Sun Yat-sen Mausoleum, where group photos were taken under a plaque stating: "The KMT president is buried here."

I suddenly realized that the KMT had spent 40,000 taels of silver to build all this, a piece of the KMT's party assets that China now viewed as a piece of its political history. Although China does not recognize the Republic of China, it has used threats to prevent Taiwan from changing its flag, its anthem and its emblem.

Even as Beijing is about to place the party emblem (national emblem) over the Nanjing Presidential Office, which is just a huge illegal structure representing the party state, Taiwan is demanding that this symbol be removed. Cross-state relations of this sort seem to be another of the KMT's ill-gotten party assets.

Hsu Yung-ming is an assistant research fellow of Sun Yat-sen Institute for Social Sciences and Philosophy at Academia Sinica.

Editorial: Expand the Mongolian experience

The International Cooperation and Development Fund is training Mongolian owners of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), so that they can learn from this country's development of such businesses. The training program is being offered under the auspices of the the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development's Mongolia Cooperation Fund.

This is the very first international cooperation case between Taiwan and the bank in the face of China's diplomatic oppression. In terms of Taiwan's foreign assistance activities, it has turned the nation from a donor to an executor of aid projects. It is a diplomatic breakthrough with deep meaning for the nation's foreign-assistance programs.

The bank established the Mongolia Cooperation Fund in 2001 with 10.3 million euros (NT$439 million) in contributions from Japan (5 million euros), the Netherlands (3.3 million euros) and 1 million euros each from Luxembourg and Taiwan. The Mongolian fund assists that nation in implementing economic and legal reforms, so that its transformation into a market economy can proceed smoothly.

While the size of Taiwan's donation is relatively small, the development of small and medium-sized businesses in this country has been praised by the bank. This has helped offset the gap between advanced countries and those that receive their funding.

Taiwan's cultivation of SMEs and the development of its information industry and precision agricultural techniques are all areas the government can focus on in future foreign aid projects as well as being vehicles for creating diplomatic breakthroughs. These are also areas in which Beijing lags behind Taipei.

In future, therefore, it should be possible for Taiwan to rely on the experience of its own economic development and strength to propose cooperation programs in international economic organizations based on our economic superiority. The government could use its aid money to facilitate the integration of more international resources to implement foreign aid programs and turn Taiwan into a new force for international economic cooperation and development.

This would also create more room for diplomatic activities, and the nation would no longer have to worry about Chinese pressure and isolation.

The suggestions made by Taiwan at APEC's Small and Medium Enterprises Working Group have been praised every year by other members. This is a great example of using Taiwan's economic strength at international events. The Mongolian fund experience is a good example for the foreign and economic affairs ministries to follow. Those ministries should become more confident and active when making suggestions to international economic organizations to highlight Taiwan's unique economic abilities. This would help show that Taiwan's development experience could be used as a reference for developing countries and raise the nation's international profile.

Many advanced countries, including Japan and Australia, use a combination of diplomacy and aid in their international relations, and have, therefore, been able to make their presence felt both politically and commercially on the international stage. In the 1950s and 1960s, Taiwan was known for sending agricultural teams to Africa and the South Pacific. Taiwan now has another opportunity to use its diligence and wisdom to act globally, paving the way for further economic diplomacy.

US deploys Patriot battery of missiles in South Korea
AFP , SEOUL
US military authorities said yesterday they had deployed new batteries of ground-to-air Patriot missiles in the southwestern city of Gwangju, a move that has triggered strong protests from activists there.

The deployment of two upgraded Patriot missile batteries in Gwangju, 187km southwest of Seoul, is part of a global redeployment program of US forces.

The 8th US Army had since late April been moving its 35th Air Defense Brigade from Fort Bliss, Texas and its two upgraded Patriot missile batteries to South Korea.

"The deployment of Patriot PAC-3 Air Defense Artillery Brigade was completed last week with the final load of equipment into Gwangju Air Base," the US Forces in Korea said in a statement.

The new missile brigade will be headquartered in the US air base at Osan, 35km south of Seoul, and its two missile batteries will be based in Gwangju.

The US forces will also retain their six existing Patriot missile batteries -- PAC-1 or PAC-2 batteries -- in South Korea under the command of the new brigade, US command officials said.

The deployment of new missiles has met angry protests from activists in Gwangju, formerly spelled Kwangju, and known for anti-US sentiment.

Activists and students in Gwangju have launched a campaign with a target to collect signatures from 100,000 people opposed to the missile deployment and have been holding rallies and street marches against the move.

The US Forces in Korea said in the statement the air defense brigade and Eighth US Army leadership "appreciate the cooperation of the Gwangju citizens" for the deployment.

"We also understand the need to be a good neighbor within the community and will work closely with the people of Gwangju to foster good communication, cultural awareness and mutual understanding," it said.

The deployment is part of Washington's force improvement program aimed to compensate for its plan to redeploy its forces in South Korea, under which one third of its 37,500 troops in the country will be pulled out in phases until September 2008.

The number of US troops to be withdrawn includes 3,600 already transferred to Iraq this year. The troops in Iraq will not return to South Korea.

The deployment of new missiles is part of an US$11 billion spending program aimed at compensating for the reduction in the number of troops, including high-speed vessels, attack helicopters and armored vehicles.