US warns EU again over arms embargo

MILITARY TIES: A senior State Department official said that the EU could face trade sanctions if it lifts its ban. The US, however, aims to boost military links with China

By Charles Snyder

STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON , WITH AFP IN HONG KONG

The US has issued a stern warning to the EU not to lift its embargo on arms sales to Beijing, as Chinese President Hu Jintao arrived in London at the beginning of a three-nation tour in which he plans to make lifting the embargo a "top priority," according to China's state-run media.

The warning was delivered by Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs John Hillen in a speech before the 18th Global Trade Controls Conference in London last week. The State Department has just released the text of his remarks.

Hillen, the department's top official for international security and defense trade, said that the EU could find itself faced with tough military trade sanctions from the US if it lifts the embargo.

NO DOUBTS

"I want to leave our European friends in no doubt that if the EU lifts its embargo on China, this will raise a major obstacle to future US defense cooperation with Europe," he said, arguing that if the embargo is lifted, Congress would impose such sanctions.

"There is no doubt as to the strength of congressional feelings on this issue. I think we can count on it: should the EU lift its embargo, the US Congress will legislate," he said.

However, whether Congress would do that is still uncertain. An effort to penalize the EU should the embargo be lifted failed in the House of Representative in July, when a business lobbying juggernaut convinced more than 100 members who had voted in favor of the penalties to change their vote at the last minute, killing the measure.

That legislation would have required the president to impose an array of penalties for at least two years against any EU nation or firm which persisted in selling China major weapons that could be used in connection with an attack on Taiwan.

Washington is especially concerned that the weapons and technology would be used against US forces coming to Taiwan's aid in the case of an attack.

BUSINESS OPPOSITION

Business groups, headed by the US Chamber of Commerce and such big China suppliers as the Boeing Co, would be expected to mount as strong an effort to defeat any future penalizing legislation.

Hillen welcomed the EU's efforts to strengthen its code of conduct on arms sales, which some in Europe see as an effective alternative to the embargo.

However,, he said, "we do not believe that even a strengthened code of conduct is an adequate substitute for the EU's China arms embargo," or would prevent a "qualitative or quantitative increase in EU arms transfer to China."

Hu's trip is part of an effort to rebuild EU-Chinese relations strained by the arms embargo issue. The EU was scheduled to lift the ban last summer, but China's passage of its "Anti-Secession" Law and strong US pressure to retain the embargo, convinced the EU to keep the ban in place.

The embargo was imposed after the 1989 Tienamen Square Massacre to protest China's civil-rights record.

After visiting Europe, Hu will attend the APEC summit in South Korea and then will play host to US President George Bush in Beijing next week.

US-CHINA TIES

Hu and Bush will endorse a full-scale resumption of exchanges between their countries' militaries during their Beijing talks, the South China Morning Post said yesterday.

Citing unnamed sources, the Post said the leaders will back talks between their governments and militaries to explore the possibility of sending observers to take part in each other's military exercises.

The talks will cover setting up hot lines linking military commands or defense ministers and establishing joint ocean rescue exercises, areas that have long been sought by Washington but thought politically difficult by Beijing, the newspaper said.

The leaders will agree to a resumption of regular exchanges of senior and mid-level military personnel and of military academics and the reciprocal training of officers in military institutes.

Military exchange programs were suspended in 2001 when relations chilled following a series of clashes, including a collision between a Chinese fighter jet and a US surveillance plane off China's southern coast.

Asian nations restricting religion: US

ANNUAL REPORT: China, North Korea, Vietnam and Myanmar were singled out by the US for perpetrating or tolerating severe violations of religious freedoms

AGENCIES , WASHINGTON AND BEIJING

The US on Tuesday named China, North Korea, Vietnam and Myanmar as serious violators of religious freedom in the annual State Department report to the US Congress.

China and its neighbors joined Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Eritrea as nations designated "countries of particular concern," the State Department said.

"These are countries where governments have engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom over the past year," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters as she unveiled the report, covering 197 countries.

Still, she held up Vietnam, which remained on the worst violators list, as an example of a country that had made progress this year, including signing a pact with Washington over how the Southeast Asian state would improve religious rights.

Vietnam improves

"If Vietnam's record of improvement continues, it would enable us to eventually remove Vietnam from our list of countries of particular concern," Rice said.

John Hanford, the US envoy for international religious freedom, said Hanoi had made some "very significant efforts to improve religious freedom," including passing new laws, releasing 14 prisoners and opening some closed churches.

The report placed China, North Korea and Myanmar on a list of authoritarian states which "regard some or all religious groups as enemies of the state because of their religious beliefs or their independence from central authority."

In China, where those wanting to worship are restricted to state-sanctioned groups, "religious leaders and adherents, including those in official churches, were detained, arrested or sentenced to prison or re-education-through-labor camps," the report said.

China had no immediate comment yesterday on the criticism, though it regularly says its Constitution guarantees religious freedom and that the US should not interfere in its affairs.

The report said Beijing seeks to control all religious activity, especially when it could be linked to political goals such as in the independence-minded regions of Tibet, which is mostly Buddhist, and Xinjiang, which is largely Muslim.

China requires Roman Catholics and Protestants to worship in state-controlled churches, though enforcement varies widely, the report said. It said officials in some areas work with both official and independent religious groups to accomplish social goals.

Threats and extortion

But ``in some areas, security authorities used threats, demolition of unregistered property, extortion, interrogation, detention, and at times beatings and torture to harass leaders of unauthorized groups and their followers,'' it said.

Despite the controls, religious activity is on the rise in China, it said.

China singles out Falun Gong for extra scrutiny, and "there have been credible reports of deaths due to torture and abuse," the report said.

China bans Falun Gong as an "evil cult." Imprisoned followers who refuse to recant their beliefs are sometimes treated harshly, the report said.

"While the Falun Gong are not officially a religion, more a spiritual movement, the suffering that they've endured is unspeakable," Hanford said.

Hanford said Beijing had, however, demonstrated a willingness to engage with Washington to improve religious freedom.

"My hope is that we will be able to turn a corner with China," he said, noting that US President George W. Bush would likely re-inforce that message in a visit to China next week.

In North Korea, "religious freedom does not exist," the report said.

It cited refugee accounts of executions of underground Christians and unconfirmed claims that Christians were tortured for reading the Bible.

`Chilling'

"Some of these reports are chilling in terms of arrests and torture and imprisonment, large numbers of people of faith in prison camps in North Korea," Hanford said.

Traditionally Buddhist Myanmar, run by various forms of military junta since 1962, "continued to engage in particularly severe violations of religious freedom," the report said.

The Myanmar government curbed efforts by Buddhist clergy to promote human rights while actively restricting non-Buddhist faiths and promoting Buddhism over other religions, particularly among ethnic minorities, the report said.

Taiwan is US territory

By Roger Lin

There have been numerous articles in the Taipei Times saying that Taiwan is already an independent sovereign nation, or asserting that the independence and sovereignty of Taiwan should be recognized. The point is to stress that Taiwan should be acknowledged by the world community as a normal country and that its diplomatic isolation should be ended.

I regret to say that I see no chance of Taiwan being recognized as a normal country in the near future. Taiwan is not, at the most basic level, a country at all.

Many writers have listed the four criteria for statehood as specified in the Montevideo Convention of 1934. Taiwan seems to meet all of them, but in fact it doesn't.

As an example, let's look at "a defined territory." There was no transfer of the "sovereignty" of Formosa and the Pescadores (Penghu) to the Republic of China (ROC) on Oct. 25, 1945. That date merely marks the beginning of the military occupation of Taiwan by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Moreover, there was no transfer of sovereignty of these areas in the postwar peace treaty. What is the role of the ROC in Formosa and the Pescadores today? The answer is "squatter."

I regret that most of the contributors to your editorial page fail to recognize this fact. The few who do, however, go on to say that whatever the postwar legal reality might have been, the situation today is different. I categorize their misconceptions below.

First, that the ROC now has title to Taiwan based on "prescription," ie, long and continuous ownership: This mistakes prescription for territorial cession. Taiwan was a territorial cession in Article 2b of the San Francisco treaty, and there must be a clear transfer of territorial title in order for this to be recognized as valid. The doctrine of "prescription" cannot be invoked under such circumstances.

Second, that the ROC now has title to Taiwan based on "popular sovereignty." This mistakes popular sovereignty for territorial sovereignty. "Popular sovereignty" is the right for the people to hold elections, to institute impeachment proceedings and the like.

Third, that the ROC has title to Taiwan based on "full control over the Taiwan area, secondary to no one." This mistakes "effective territorial control" for "territorial sovereignty." "Territorial sovereignty" is held by a government. There would have to be a clear transfer of title to the territory of Formosa and the Pescadores to the ROC under the San Francisco treaty in order for this to be accepted as valid.

Will saying that, "We are already independent," or "Our independence should be recognized" help the Taiwanese people to accomplish these goals? The answer is no.

After the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan, the Japanese emperor agreed to an unconditional surrender on Aug. 15, 1945. On Sept. 2, General Douglas MacArthur issued General Order No. 1, which described procedures for surrender ceremonies and military occupation in more than 20 areas. After examining this order, we need to answer an important question: "Who is the occupying power?"

The only possible answer is the US. This is confirmed by Article 23 of the San Francisco treaty -- the US is described as "the principal occupying power."

With this in mind, the Taiwanese people can demand that the US commander-in-chief issue the order for the ROC to disband, because the ROC is now blocking the Taiwanese people from enjoying fundamental rights under the US Constitution. With the ROC out of the way, Taiwan can change its name and make preparations for a constitutional convention to draft a new constitution.

This would not be a unilateral change to the status quo, just a full clarification of it. Could the US president object to such a procedure? If so, he could be impeached. For the benefit of Taiwan's future, pro-Taiwan groups in the US should promote this strategy among members of the US Congress.

Roger Lin

Taipei

Editor's note: It is the position of this newspaper that Taiwanese, as constituents of a democratic state, may refuse to recognize any claim on their territory or ignore any treaty to which they are not a signatory -- including the much-cited San Francisco treaty, which, barring the fanciful prospect of a unilateral declaration of sovereignty over Taiwan by the US, has precious little bearing on the real-life dangers threatening this nation today.