Military spokesman Liu Chih-chien said the navy was the main participant in the exercise, with Cheng Kung-class, Kang Ting-class, Chin Chiang-class and Chi Yang-class ships taking part.

The goal of the drill was to test the joint combat capability of the navy and air force in terms of both defense and offense.

China slams Japan's defense white paper

REUTERS, BEIJING

China has dismissed a Japanese defense report urging vigilance against its military modernization, saying the "irresponsible" move would lead to suspicions and antagonism and undermine bilateral ties.

Japan's annual defense white paper, released on Tuesday, said China’s military modernization, including apparent plans for a deep-water navy, needed to be monitored closely to determine whether it exceeds requirements for self-defense.

"There is no factual basis and it is extremely irresponsible of an official Japanese document to publicly play up the so-called ‘Chinese treat’," a Chinese foreign Ministry spokesman said in a statement seen on the ministry Web site yesterday.

"This is not conducive to the two countries establishing mutual trust regarding security and will only mislead the public, lead to mutual suspicions and antagonism, and undermine Sino-Japanese relations, the spokesman said."

"We hope the Japanese said will take the long-term development of Sino-Japanese ties as a starting point in consideration and do more that is conducive to improving mutual trust and friendly feelings instead oft lie opposite," he said.

The ministry may have been restrained, but an editorial in the official China Daily was unceremoniously outspoken.

Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has proposed revising the country’s postwar, pacifist constitution to allow Japan to possess a military not only to defend itself but to play a greater role in global security.

"It is not difficult to see the bare fangs and brandished claws in the proposal," the editorial said.

"The LDP's proposed revision of the constitution demonstrates Japan’s new mindset－encouraging military expansion. This is nerve wracking. "

The editorial accused Japan of portraying itself as "the only victim of atomic arms," adding: "The depth of Japan’s remorse [for World War II atrocities] is in doubt."

"Without a guilty conscience, Japan is attempting to turn itself into a regional military bully," the editorial concluded.

The Japanese white paper, which appears at a time of strained Sino-Japanese ties, echoes a US Defense Department report in July that said China's fast modernizing military could pose a long term threat to the region.

Defense Minister Yoshinori Ohno said, however, that Japan did not see China as a military threat.

The report also stressed Japan's concern about China's Passage in March of an "Anti-Secession" law. authorizing the use of "non-peaceful-means" to re-unify with Taiwan. Beijing claims sovereignty over the self ruled democratic island which split with the mainland when the Communists won power there in 1949.

Opposition still missing the point

President Chen Shui-bian has come up with the idea of having the leaders of the major political parties accompany him on a state visit to Central American allies next month. Chen's aides said the idea was that if political leaders joined the fight for Taiwan's diplomatic recognition, it could help break the stalemate between the government and the opposition parties.

While both Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairman Su Tseng-chang and Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) Chairman Shu Chin-chiang have made positive remarks about the trip, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) were decidedly cool. KMT chairman-elect Ma Ying-jeou said he would be too busy, while the PFP's new caucus whip, Hwang Yih-jiau, said he would urge PFP Chairman James Soong not to go because the party needed to focus on national issues such as cross-strait affairs and the economy.

It is a shame that opposition leaders continue to allow themselves to be hogtied by political gamesmanship, even when it comes to diplomacy which, for Taiwan, is a constant battle in the face of Beijing's unrelenting obstructionism.

Issues such as diplomacy and national security are matters of strong public consensus and should be free from political squabbles.

The opposition leaders should, for the sake of the nation and consolidation of its democracy, put aside their political wrangling to join Chen on his next state visit and assist him in diplomatic efforts.

Ma and Soong, who both once served as English secretary to late president Chiang Ching-kuo, should have a deeper understanding of Taiwan's plight in terms of its diplomatic situation.

Now that Chen is willing to share the role of diplomacy that has for so long been the sole preserve of the head of the state, the opposition leaders should welcome his offer out of a sense of national solidarity.

The KMT and the PFP may be reluctant to join Chen because they do not want to help the administration score any points at home or abroad. But such a trip offers both parties the chance to obtain a first-hand understanding of Taiwan's diplomatic situation. It would also serve as experience for a future government.

If Ma, who will assume the helm of the KMT later this month, can accept Chen's invitation with an open mind, it would doubtless help break the stalemate between the government and the opposition parties. It would also help the KMT ditch its image as a party that opposes just for the sake of opposing -- the image it has developed under Chairman Lien Chan. Lien has been belligerent toward the government ever since he lost the 2000 presidential election to Chen. Last year's loss only served to harden his position.

Ma has said he wants to convince the public that under his leadership, the KMT is turning over a new leaf. But by rejecting Chen's trip out of hand, Ma looks like he is simply walking down the same "anti-Chen" road that Lien has stumbled along for five years. The nation deserves more than that.

Beijing's leaders should grow up

By Chen Hurng-yu

If we take a look at the way China has been treating Taiwan over the past few years, we will find that it has been using unorthodox methods that have made it a laughing stock in the international community. The incessant attacks on Taiwan make it clear that the mental make-up of Chinese leaders is different from that of normal people. In most international conflicts, there has been hatred between the opposing peoples and national borders have changed, but this hatred has subsided with time. It is rare that such national hatred continues for decades. Except for the hatred between Arabs and Jews, this kind of hatred is probably only found within the Chinese nation.

China has been defeated once by Britain, once by France and three times by Japan. These humiliations have been deeply impressed in the Chinese nation's collective memory. The goal for modern China, whether under the leadership of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), has been to restore China's past glory.

These two parties subscribe to different ideologies and have fought one another. Both parties have been steeped in blood, violence and extortion, and their long battle has distorted the minds and dispositions of their leaders. In particular, they have taken forceful revenge on states and political parties that treated them violently in the past.

The Chinese nation is filled with anxiety. It wants to restore its past glory, but has no way of doing so. Instead its government is applying hate to foreign relations and using xenophobia to build national confidence.

The CCP fought several large wars after its rise to power. During the Korean War the CCP shouted "Oppose the US and help Korea" while during the Vietnam War, the slogan was "Resist US imperialism." Japan was protected by the US, so the People's Republic of China (PRC) couldn't start a war with Japan and was instead forced to start a "cold war."

After establishing diplomatic relations with Tokyo, the PRC demanded Japanese aid as an unwritten condition for not seeking war indemnities. Yet Beijing often vilifies Japan and demands apologies, thus forming a unique variety of "apologetic diplomacy." In April, Beijing initiated anti-Japanese hysteria that led to the sacking of some Japanese businesses and a refusal to purchase Japanese goods. Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi was made to once again apologize for Tokyo's action's during World War II.

What kind of diplomacy is that? Sixty-five years have gone by since World War II ended. It is very rare to see such sustained international hatred. China has risen to become one of the world's great nations and should as a result command respect and praise. Instead it takes this kind of attitude on the international stage, which makes one wonder if today's Chinese government is any different from the Qing dynasty. Its diplomacy is a strange mixture of superiority and inferiority.

Fighting between the US and Japan during World War II was no less intense than the fighting between China and Japan, so when the allied powers defeated Japan, it would only have been right for the Japanese to hate the US. So why don't they?

The US and Vietnam fought a nearly decade-long war, longer than World War II. Afterwards, however, Vietnam did not hate the US, but wanted to establish diplomatic relations. Instead it was the US that fretted and was unwilling to establish ties. The situation was normalized in 1995, but I have never heard any requests for apologies for any actions during the war. The Vietnamese people are instead mistrustful of China, despite all the aid Beijing gave them during the war.

Another recent example is East Timor, which was occupied by Indonesia in 1976. The local people rose up in a resistance that lasted for 23 years before they, with the help of the UN, won their independence in a referendum. East Timor became an independent state in May 2002, and Indonesia's then-president Megawati Sukarnoputri attended the independence ceremony. Indonesian diplomacy displayed flexibility and maintained no hatred toward East Timor for breaking away.

Looking at the diplomatic behavior of these nations, we see that intense war has not stopped them from looking to the future and establishing relations between both the countries and people following the end of the fighting.

But if we look at the cross-strait relationship from the same perspective, things look very different. China is hostile and devious in its dealings with Taiwan, and the destruction of the Taiwanese government has become an obsession for Beijing's leaders. Prior to 2000, Beijing attacked the KMT government. Now that the KMT is out of power, the CCP has established friendly relations with it and instead attacks the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government. Such behavior is a blatant show of the darker sides of the human character.

China legitimizes its claims on Taiwan by continuing to talk of the Chinese Civil War, but such empty talk is only an excuse to pressure Taiwan and a talisman which Beijing's leadership uses to consolidate their hold on power. The pressure China applies to Taiwan may not fill a book on the PRC's diplomacy, but it would account for a substantial part of it.

China recently launched a "fruit war" against Taiwan by unilaterally lifting import tariffs on 15 types of fruit from Taiwan and holding meetings about the plan with non-governmental Taiwanese groups selected by Beijing.

We can't help asking if such domineering behavior is the behavior of a civilized state. If China really wants to establish contact with Taiwan it would, in fact, be as easy as going through appointed organizations authorized by both sides.

In order to help the economic situation in Indochina, China has signed an agreement lifting import taxes on agricultural products from Thailand as well as pacts giving Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar preferential commodity and import taxes. But this is not the approach it uses toward Taiwan. Instead its actions have given an impression of deviousness. What is supposed to be a good thing leads to a lot of side effects that outweigh the gains.

The fundamental problem is that Beijing's leaders are afraid of taking a good, straight look at Taiwan. They are influenced by a minority of people with ulterior motives, which in turn leads to unorthodox methods that have a negative impact on the PRC's international standing.

Beijing cannot control Taiwan, nor can it attack Taiwan militarily, and even if it did, it would not be able to guarantee long-lasting peaceful rule.

Why can't the CCP leadership learn from the ancients who said that as long as the local population is happy, more distant nations will also flock around? Judging from the speed of China's current development, it won't be long before it can join the ranks of developed states and win the respect of its neighbors.

Beijing's relentless pressure on Taiwan will not force Taiwan into submission -- it will only cause widespread resentment. The fact is that Taiwan is not hostile to China, nor is it trying to challenge the Beijing government. The wishes of the Taiwanese people are very simple: we want to lead our own lives, without being pressured by foreign powers. Taiwan does not accept Chinese rule, and this is a view that does not differ much between different parties or peoples.

China, however, continues to use Taiwan independence as an excuse for creating cross-strait hostility, despite its addiction to Taiwanese capital and technology. What kind of mindset is that? China is molding itself into a government with ulterior motives, filled with the ambition to annex Taiwan, and then it says that it is offering the people of Taiwan advantages. How could such behavior help them build credibility? Maybe Beijing's leaders are unaware that the Taiwanese people are fed up with their methods.

China needs to move toward becoming a "normal state." Only by placing itself in a position where it is willing to shoulder international responsibilities, see Taiwan's existence for what it is and stop playing name games will China gain the respect of the international community.

Chen Hurng-yu is a professor in National Chengchi University's history department.