US may make mistakes in `war on terror,' Rice says

DIPLOMATIC DEFENSE: After meeting with Germany's new chancellor, the US secretary of state reiterated that Washington is using `every lawful means' to combat terrorists

AGENCIES , BERLIN

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice admitted yesterday that the US may make mistakes in its "war on terrorism" and promised to put them right if they happened.

"We recognize any policy will sometimes result in errors, and when it happens, we will do everything we can to rectify it," Rice said at the start of a European tour overshadowed by allegations of illegal CIA methods against terrorist suspects.

Rice also said the Bush administration will use "every lawful means" to combat international terrorism and does not condone torture.

"We have an obligation to defend our people and we will use every lawful means to do so," Rice said after talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin.

Merkel said Rice's assurances were "important" for her to hear and said the meeting, the highest-ranking official contact between Berlin and Washington since Merkel became chancellor last month, signaled a "good start" for future German-US relations.

Rice, however, declined to comment on the case of a German man, Khaled el-Masri, who was allegedly abducted to Afghanistan and imprisoned there for five months last year until the CIA realized it had the wrong man.

But Merkel said the US government had acknowledged it blundered over Masri, who plans to sue the CIA in a case to be filed in the US later yesterday.

"I'm pleased to say that we spoke about the individual case, which was accepted by the United States as a mistake, and so I'm very pleased the foreign minister [Rice] has reiterated that if mistakes are made, they must immediately be rectified," Merkel told a joint news conference.

Masri's case has caused a furore in Germany, fueled by a US newspaper report that the former interior minister was told of the case in May last year and agreed to a request from the US ambassador to keep it quiet.

Merkel said she would ask Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier to report on the Masri case to the parliamentary committee responsible for supervising security services.

Rice was not challenged directly over reports that the US had run secret prisons in Eastern Europe, which Washington has refused to confirm or deny.

But she reiterated her vigorous defense of US methods in its war on 21st century militants.

"If you don't get to them before they commit their crimes, they will commit mass murder," she said. "We have an obligation to defend our people and we will use every lawful means to do so."

Rice said combating terrorism required close security cooperation, but intelligence methods could not be made public nor specific cases discussed.

"Without good intelligence, you can simply not protect innocent civilians from the kind of attacks we have experienced around the globe," she said.

She stressed that the US operated strictly "within the context of laws and our international obligations," an assurance welcomed by Merkel.

Europe's leading human rights watchdog is probing the press reports on CIA secret prisons, as well as flights by CIA planes across the continent, which it believes may have been used to covertly transport terrorist suspects.

The EU and at least eight of its members have sought clarification from Washington.

A new TV report on Monday cited current and former CIA officials saying al-Qaeda suspects had been held in Europe until last month, but then were then sent to a new CIA facility in the north African desert.

ABC News said two secret prisons operated by the US Secret Service in Poland and Romania were closed just ahead of Rice's visit to Europe.

It said the US scrambled to get all the suspects off European soil before Rice arrived.

Polish Defense Minister Radoslaw Sikorski told ABC News: "My president has said there is no truth in these reports."

Standing firm to cross-strait pressure

To keep up the momentum following their victory in last Saturday's local government elections, pan-blue legislators yesterday resumed pressing the government to relax its China policy. Although the Democratic Progressive Party suffered an unprecedented defeat, it must not bow to political pressure, but must continue to uphold Taiwan's interests and maintain consistency in the country's China policy.

Yesterday, the pan-blues proposed that flights from Macau and Hong Kong should be allowed to make use of Taipei's Sungshan Airport. The pan-blues also want to put a "direct transport links" bill up for its second reading in the legislature on top of the "cross-strait peace advancement bill," which is already being discussed. These tactics are clearly aimed at compelling the government to compromise on all its principles regarding China. But the question we must ask is what benefit such compromises will bring to Taiwanese people?

The runway of Taipei's Sungshan Airport is too short to efficiently accommodate flights from Macau and Hong Kong. Quite apart from this, the Ministry of Transportation and Communications has indicated that the airport has already reached its capacity in handling domestic flights, and at best only eight flights from Macau or Hong Kong could be accommodated each day. Not to mention the as yet unsolved security question, and the crucial problem of China's unwillingness to negotiate with the government on direct cross-strait charter flights remains. In such circumstances, it is rather meaningless to open up Sungshan up to China, unless it is simply to precipitate the dissolution of the government's cross-strait policy.

Recent statements regarding the relaxing or tightening of cross-strait policy should be regarded as no more than pre-election rhetoric and not given too much weight. Moreover, these were only local government elections, so now is clearly time for the emotions of the campaign to be put aside and for cross-strait policy to be given mature and dispassionate consideration based on the best interests of the Taiwanese people.

The pros and cons of legislating for direct cross-strait flights prior to negotiating the principles of direct flights for cargo and passenger flights across the Taiwan Strait are perfectly clear, and the pan-blue camp's efforts to "slice off its own flesh to feed the vultures" will certainly meet with public censure.

The cross-strait peace advancement bill is an even bigger policy black hole, for it is not only illegal and unconstitutional, but it goes against the best interests of the people. If the pan-blues push this law through in the aftermath of their electoral success, they will bring disaster down on the heads of all Taiwanese.

As a legal expert and a former deputy chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou, should understand the absurdity of such a law. Prior to the elections, Ma may have been unwilling to undermine pan-blue cooperation by making a clear statement regarding this law, but now, with Ma riding high on a wave of pan-blue support and the manifest decline of the People First Party (PFP), Ma should come out with a clearly stated position on this bill.

There is no need to make any concessions to the extreme ideas of the PFP and any assessment of the law should be made on the basis of the best interests of the Taiwanese people and with the goal of creating benign interaction between the government, the opposition and China.

The DPP loses when it abandons localization

By Chin Heng-wei

The PAN-green camp's supporters gave the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) a reprimand through its serious defeat in the Dec. 3 local government elections.

Take Taipei County for example: the DPP lost a lot of support in traditional pro-green districts, while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) won big in traditional pro-blue districts. The DPP's support base shrank while the KMT's swelled. No wonder the DPP lost the county.

Now, what is the lesson for the DPP? Why are its supporters angry with it? What issues does it have to think through?

The DPP succeeded in transforming itself from an opposition party into a ruling party. Perhaps the power transition in 2000 was the will of God, thanks to the pan-blue camp's split. But the re-election of President Chen Shui-bian was the voters' choice. The pan-green camp won last years' presidential election because of its localized nature, while the KMT lost because of its "party-state" core.

The significance of the election was that the pro-independence pan-green camp and the pro-unification pan-blue camp underwent a "golden crossover," with mainstream opinion in Taiwan switching from the pan-blue camp's China-centric position to the pan-green camp's Taiwan-centric one. On that occasion, it was the reason the DPP was able to win over Taiwanese people's hearts.

As one falls in politics, another rises. Politics is always a seesaw. And even though the DPP controls the central government, it cannot afford to lose its comparative advantage in relation to the KMT. Its advantage lies in its local ideology. Unfortunately, there has been a tide of ideological backsliding in the DPP as it has tried to appeal to moderate voters, and it has cost the party its political advantage.

There is nothing wrong with appealing to moderates, but political ideals should not be sacrificed in the process. As the party curried favor with moderate voters while moving away from the pan-greens, it was inevitable that its original supporters would become irritated.

Looking back at Taiwan's history, why did former DPP chairman Shih Ming-teh fail to achieve his "great reconciliation?" Why did former DPP legislator Shen Fu-hsiung fail to be re-elected after moving toward the middle? Wasn't the DPP's defeat this time a result of its policy of "reconciliation and coexistence?"

In contrast, Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng has been severely attacked by pan-blue camp lawmakers because of his insistence on Taiwan's localization. Despite this he remains at his post, and has become a pan-green camp favorite.

Government Information Office Minister Pasuya Yao withdrew the licenses of seven television stations and punished TVBS for exceeding limits on foreign capital. Although he was also severely attacked by the outside world, he has become the pan-green camp's hero. Would the DPP lose support if the Cabinet was full of people like Tu and Yao?

It is necessary for the DPP to assess itself following its defeat. But the point is not a Cabinet reshuffle or a new premier. If the pan-green camp continues to curry favor with the pan-blue camp and fails to insist on and fight for what it should -- while forgetting justice and giving up its ideals to reach a compromise -- its defeat in last week's elections will be the first of many. Every thing depends on how well the DPP has learned its lesson.

Chin Heng-wei is the editor-in-chief of the Contemporary Monthly magazine.