US calls on Beijing to talk to Chen

NO CONDITIONS: In his testimony to Congress, the State Department's top East Asia official said that China should drop its insistence on `one China'

By Charles Snyder

STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON

The US for the first time has called on China to engage in dialogue with President Chen Shui-bian and his government without the conditions demanded by Beijing, which have stymied efforts to ease cross-strait tensions ever since Chen was elected president in 2000.

The call came from the State Department's top East Asia official at a congressional hearing on the economic and security aspects of China's emergence as an East Asian regional power.

Enunciating the US position on cross-strait talks, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia Christopher Hill, said, "Our view is that dialogue should just be dialogue, and should not be centered on any conditions."

But Beijing is not yet ready to engage in cross-strait dialogue under such unconditional terms, Hill told the hearing.

China has repeatedly said a dialogue with Chen or the DPP government is possible only under the "one China" principle.

Nevertheless, he called the recent trips to China by opposition leaders KMT Chairman Lien Chan and PFP Chairman James Soong a possible "basis for a substantive dialogue" between China and the Chen government.

In his testimony before the panel, the East Asia subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Hill was not asked about, and did not comment on, Chen's statement earlier this week saying that the US would be a good third-party venue for any talks between himself and Chinese President Hu Juntao.

Asked about the Lien and Soong visits, Hill said, "the dialogue with the opposition leaders was a good step, and I think it allowed for a change in the dynamic following the `Anti-Secession' Law," referring to the law that the rubber-stamp National People's Congress passed in March at the insistence of the Hu government, which legalizes a Chinese military attack on Taiwan.

"Whether they are able to capitalize on this step, whether they are able to follow through, remains to be seen. The Beijing government is not yet prepared to deal with the elected authorities of Taiwan because they're expecting conditions with the elected authorities set forward," Hill said, as determined by a tape of his remarks before the subcommittee.

He then expressed the US view that talks should take place without pre-conditions.

In his prepared written testimony, Hill said it is "crucial" that China go beyond the recent Lien-Soong visits and "take the important next step of reaching out to elected representatives in Taiwan. We believe that recently stated positions on both sides of the strait incorporate elements of flexibility that could form the basis of substantive dialogue."

He did not give details of the reasons for his conclusions.

Hill reiterated earlier US pronouncements that the US government "strongly encourages cross-strait dialogue of all forms," which has led the State Department earlier this year to "welcome" the opposition leaders' trips.

Hill also repeated US criticism of the "Anti-Secession" Law, calling it "unfortunate" and "unhelpful" and an action that did not contribute to cross-strait dialogue.

Hill later asserted that "there is absolutely no other way" to settle the cross-strait issue than by peaceful means, "and the way to solve it is to have dialogue."

In other matters, Hill said that despite Taiwan's failure again last month to gain observer status in the World Health Assembly, the US continues to support that goal, which "does not conflict with our one-China policy."

Diplomat's claim supported by 2nd Chinese defector

AP , CANBERRA, AUSTRALIA

A second Chinese defector has backed claims by a diplomat who left his job at China's consulate in Sydney that Beijing is running a large spy network in Australia and other Western countries.

The diplomat, Chen Yonglin, walked away from his post as the first secretary at the Chinese Consulate-General last month to seek political asylum in Australia. Chen, 37, claimed China had 1,000 spies in Australia involved in illegal activities including abducting Chinese nationals and smuggling them back to China.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has dismissed Chen's claims as slander.

But a second Chinese official seeking asylum in Australia, Hao Fengjun, 32, supported Chen's claim of a Chinese spy network in Australia in an interview with Australian Broadcasting Corp television late Tuesday.

"I worked in the police office in the security bureau and I believe what Mr. Chen says is true," Hao told the ABC through an interpreter.

Hao, who traveled to Australia as a tourist in February and sought asylum, told reporters yesterday in the southern city of Melbourne he was responsible for collating and analyzing information gathered by Chinese spies in Australia and other countries, including the US and Canada.

His translator and friend Serene Luo said Hao copied 200 documents from his computer and smuggled them into Australia as evidence for immigration officials.

"He brought lots of the secret documents indicating how the public security department in China ... persecute Falun Gong and other religious groups," she said.

An immigration department spokeswoman refused to make any comment on Hao's case, citing privacy laws.

The government has yet to rule on the asylum applications of either Chen or Hao, coming at a sensitive time for Australia as it negotiates a free trade agreement with China.

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said Chen's application would be judged on its merit.

Trade Minister Mark Vaile predicted the asylum applications would not affect the trade negotiations.

Australia-China Business Council Chairman Warwick Smith said Australian businesses dealing with China agreed that burgeoning trade would not suffer.

"It's probably fair to say that the trade relationship is an extremely strong one and I don't believe that these matters will in any way impinge upon the development of that trade," Smith told the ABC.

Defense Minister Robert Hill said Chen's asylum claim was not even mentioned during his discussions with senior Chinese officials in Beijing.

"We don't comment on intelligence matters, but I think the fact that the issue hasn't been raised with me in China indicates that the Chinese side believes that Australia is dealing with the issue in an appropriate way," Hill told reporters.

Asked if the allegations of a spy ring should be investigated, Hill replied: "We never comment on intelligence matters."

The opposition Labor Party has called for a government briefing on the spy claims and for the government to reveal how many Chinese officials were seeking asylum in Australia.

Defections of high-level Chinese officials are relatively rare, analysts say, but they have been the source of valuable intelligence about the communist regime and an embarrassment to Beijing.

Absolute numbers of defectors at Chen's level aren't known -- partly because both China and the country that offers shelter to defectors often keep them secret.

Australia's domestic spy agency, ASIO, has reportedly set up a new counter-terrorism unit to improve its ability to track foreign agents. The government has refused to confirm the unit's existence.

The new counterespionage unit will focus heavily on Chinese spies, whose numbers have increased significantly in Australia over the past 10 years, the Australian newspaper reported last week.

Scientists blame humans for the greenhouse effect

REUTERS, LONDON

“It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities. ” －a statement by scientists

Scientists, including from the US and China, threw down the gauntlet to world leaders on Tuesday saying mankind was the major source of global warming and urging action, one month ahead of a G8 summit.

As leaders of the Group of Eightt industrial nations prepare to meet in Scotland－with climate change and Africa at the top of the agenda－a statement by the national science academies of 11 countries said: "It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities.

"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action," sued a statement from the science academies of the G8 nations as well as China, India and Brazil.

While most scientists agree that the burning of fossil fuels for transport and to generate electricity is a major contributor to potentially catastrophic climate change, US President George W Bush is unconvinced.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair has made tackling global wing, with its rising sea levels, increases in droughts and floods and threats to the lives of millions of the world's poorest people, a key goal of his 2005 presidency o the G8.

"It is clear that world leaders , including the G8, can no longer use uncertainty about aspects of clmate change as an excuse for not taking urgent action to cut greenhouse gas emissions," said Lord May, head of Britain's Royal Society national science academy

.

He called US Policy "misguided noted that crucial to the international acceptance of the statement was the fact that leading scientists from three of the world’s biggest developing world emitters China, India and Brazil had a1so signed it.

Blair has called for global action to cut emissions of so-called greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and insisted on a programme of action to emerge from the G8 summit at Gleneagles, some 65km front Edinburgh, on July 6-8.

Close the door to Chinese tourists

During Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan's visit to China, Beijing announced it would allow Chinese tourists to travel to Taiwan. Recently, Taiwan's pro-China media have published reports about what these tourists might like to eat and what they would buy. Some reports enthused over the free-spending ways of Chinese tourists and their purchasing power, even suggesting that Chinese entrepreneurs enjoy viewing houses on Yangminshan with an eye to buying property there. Clearly, the pro-China media envision these tourists leading a recovery of the real estate market, even though not a single deal has yet been made.

It's hard not to laugh when reading such reports, which seem to suggest that all Chinese tourists visiting Taiwan will be high-rollers. The whole prospect has been wildly exaggerated. If such reports were to be believed, the Chinese are the richest people in the world.

It is true that some of the Chinese tourists are big spenders. The government is formulating strict policies to regulating the visits of Chinese tourists. Except for people who are visiting their relatives and working in this country or traveling with organized groups, most of these travellers are Chinese government officials or employees of China's state-run enterprises. Since they do not have to spend their own money while travelling here, it is hardly surprising that they spend freely.

The government should not allow unrestricted Chinese tourism. Leaving aside China's political and military threats against Taiwan, Chinese tourists remaining in this country after their visas expire or using tourism as a pretext to find work and other issues will lead to social and legal problems. Since Taiwan is a small nation it would only take a wave of a few hundred thousand illegal workers and immigrants to cause social order in Taiwan to collapse.

As for the political and security risks, who does not believe that Beijing would use the door opened by legal tourism to build a more far-reaching and comprehensive spy network in this country? If China were to launch an attack, this fifth column could attack the national defense network.

The issue of Chinese tourism has considerable economic implications as well. Given China's huge population, 2 million visits a year would not be at all impossible. This presents a bright prospect for Taiwan's airline, tourism and restaurant industries, with the probability of massive construction to meet increased demand. The result of this would be to put Taiwan's neck more firmly than ever in China's noose, because Beijing could just as easily halt the flow of tourists to this country and these industries would bear the brunt of such a blow.

After China announced that it would permit tourism to Taiwan, reports from Shanghai revealed that the Publicity Department of the Chinese Communist Party's Central Committee had ordered the media to refrain from reporting on this matter. There has been no further word from Beijing about how tourism to Taiwan is to be handled, further raising suspicion as to the motives behind China's proposal.

The whole Chinese tourism offer is likely a ploy by Beijing to use Taiwan's pro-China forces to assist it in further deepening the domestic rifts over cross-strait policy. The government should give China the same answer to its offer of tourists as it did its offer of pandas -- thanks, but no thanks.

China visits shift balance in region

`If pro-China parties were to gain voter support, would that change the current pro-US direction, or even lead to a serious clash? Are the government and voters prepared for this?'

By Chen Hurng-yu

Both Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong visited China recently. As it is difficult to assess the impact of these visits on Taiwan's political situation, it is only appropriate that we take a closer look.

With both Lien and Soong representing their own parties in an attempt to reconcile with China, they focused on what they saw as their own best interests. But it is not, however, a simple issue of individual interests, as it involves Taiwan's strategic situation and changes to the international system in East Asia. And they have far-reaching effects on Taiwan's political situation.

If reconciliation between the KMT and the PFP on the one hand and China on the other merely meant the development of exchanges, it would not have much of an effect. If, however, it introduces China's influence into Taiwan's party politics, then the effects can no longer be ignored. This situation could be likened to opening Pandora's box, making it difficult to forecast the effect of the escaping spirit or demon.

A study of evolving East Asian relations provides new perspectives to help deal with the power struggle that Taiwan is becoming embroiled in.

Going back to the 16th century, Western nations began to arrive in the East to look for trading opportunities and to expand their power, but they were rejected by China. Seeing itself as the major Asian power, China had built a stable buffer of tributary states along its borders, and it relied on diplomatic means to control the trade of these tributary states and even their diplomatic relations.

China treated these distant Western European nations in the same way as it treated these tributary states and ordered them to pay tribute to be allowed to engage in trade.

This had a strong effect on the economic interests of Portugal, Holland, England and Spain. They began to occupy areas peripheral to China in Southeast Asia and Taiwan, and forced China to open up trading ports and markets. As far as we know, Southeast Asia was occupied by Portugal, Spain, Holland, England and France, in that order. Just as with Southeast Asia, Taiwan was also invaded, by Holland, Spain and then France.

From the perspective of power relationships, because the Western powers failed to develop the desired trade ties with China, they established contacts with China through their occupied lands. Beginning in the 16th century, the Western powers became a force to be reckoned with along China's eastern seaboard. This situation has continued to this day, with the US having taken the place of Holland, Spain and the other European nations.

After World War II, the US and Japan formed an alliance in East Asia to oppose China. The areas caught between the two sides -- the Korean Peninsula, the Taiwan Strait, Vietnam, Cambodia and Indonesia -- in the end experienced internal divisions as leading elites sided with either China or the US. North and South Korea, the KMT in Taiwan and the Chinese Communist Party in China, North and South Vietnam, the Lon Nol government and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the Jakarta government and the revolutionary government in Padang in Indonesia, were all divided into two political forces and governments. A few are worth some extra attention.

First, it has not been easy to solve these divisive issues even in cases where massive military power was used, as on the Korean Peninsula and in the Taiwan Strait.

Second, it was easier for Indonesia -- given its greater distance from China -- to solve this issue. In 1958, for example, Indonesia resolved its problems with the revolutionary government in Padang, and in 1965, it resolved the problem with its Communist insurgency, although both took a bloody toll. It was also this bipolar situation that led Indonesia to annex East Timor, and only after a long period of bloody opposition did the UN support a referendum aimed at resolving the issue of East Timor's future in 1999.

Third, North and South Vietnam present another extremely cruel example. North Vietnam turned against the international power relationships in East Asia in an attempt to change them. It paid a heavy price in the sacrifice of millions of lives when it used military force to solve the problem. Today, Vietnam has entered ASEAN and opened up relations with Western nations, proving that the road it had taken earlier and the solutions applied by North Vietnam were problematic.

The crucial factor leading to the domestic clashes and wars in these East Asian nations was that they were all pawns of the Americans and the Chinese. They fought a proxy war for these big nations that damaged the lives and property of their own populations.

This conflict lives on in only two places: the Taiwan Strait and on the Korean Peninsula. It did not begin with post-World War II competition between the US on the one hand and Russia and China on the other. Rather, it began to take shape in the 19th century. At that time, Japan began to develop, and pro-China and pro-Japanese factions began appearing among the elite in Korea.

This dragged China into war with Japan which was expanding its influence on the Korean Peninsula, and it is the reason Korean unification will be difficult so long as anti-Chinese forces -- US and Japanese -- remain in Northeast Asia.

Since the war, only a pro-US force has existed in Taiwan, together with a domestic ideology bent on unification, and this is what allowed a stable transition to democracy.

For a long time, the anti-KMT forces in Taiwan, from the tangwai to the Democratic Progressive Party, also took a pro-US stance. Although the many elections have brought competition and clashes, that is what kept the political movement on track.

Although the different political parties have remained pro-American, none has been backed by the US, and Washington has always been very positive toward democratic competition. What's more, the political parties have not relied on US support as a way to win voter support.

The cross-strait relationship is unique because of the ethnic ties between people on each side of the Taiwan Strait, and the emotional attachment to China held by those who moved to Taiwan after 1949.

This is why the situation will change once a pro-China stance appears among political parties in Taiwan. This is because the parties will be influenced by Beijing's policies on Taiwan. China's policies affecting Taiwan will polarize local political opinion, intensifying confrontation.

One foreseeable negative impact will be that new pro-Western and pro-China positions will appear among Taiwan's political parties.

Is Taiwan's democracy mature enough to withstand such a challenge? History shows that unification-independence issues involving ideological positions aren't easily resolved through democratic means. It will not be difficult to imagine the serious consequences of political parties introducing Chinese forces into Taiwan's political arena.

We must face up to one thing: Taiwan remains a link in the structure of the US-Japanese security alliance. The recent reiteration by the two countries that the Strait falls within the scope of their security concerns clearly explains Taiwan's strategic situation. I don't think this situation will change in the short term, and attempts to change it will have tragic consequences for Taiwan.

We will see changes to Taiwan's party politics in the foreseeable future. If pro-China parties were to gain voter support, would that change the current pro-US direction, or even lead to a serious clash? Are the government and voters prepared for this?

Chen Hurng-yu is a professor in the department of history at National Cheng-chi University.