20051216

President Chen Shui-bian yesterday said that he plans to reshuffle the Cabinet to rebuild people's confidence in the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) commitment to clean governance.

This was the first time the president has mentioned reshuffling the Cabinet since the DPP's punishing defeat in the Dec. 3 elections.

"Clean governance is the minimum demand for any government, as well as the highest expectation of the Taiwanese people, and it has to be realized by means of a Cabinet reshuffle in the future," the president said.

President Chen Shui-bian, fourth left, yesterday shakes hands with White Terror victims and their families at the launch of a documentary about the suppression of political dissent in Taiwan in the 1950s.

He did not say when the changes to the Cabinet line-up would be made.

Chen made the remarks while attending a screening of a documentary about the victims of the White Terror era and their families, who were targeted in the suppression of political dissent in the 1950s.

The president confirmed speculation that the DPP government plans to reshuffle the Cabinet after being trounced by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in the elections.

"It is the adherence to clean governance, with the support of the people, which has kept the DPP alive and thriving over the past 19 years," Chen said.

A series of corruption scandals involving DPP officials that came to light in the run-up to the elections raised questions about the party's integrity and reform policies, negatively influencing its election results.

Aside from reaffirming the DPP's commitment to clean governance, the president said his administration will keep pursuing the goals of promoting Taiwan consciousness and democratic reform.

"Enhancing Taiwan consciousness and normalizing cross-strait relations are two endeavors that can complement each other. Only if Taiwan keeps growing in strength will it have the necessary bargaining chips to negotiate with the other side and break the deadlock in the Strait," Chen said.

Chen said that the shooting of protesters during a Dec. 6 riot in China's Guangdong Province reflected the brutal nature of the Beijing government, which focuses on improving China's economic performance while ignoring its abominable human rights record.

The president said that he plans to make Taiwan a paragon of democracy to set an example for China.

"We have to help China to transform itself into a democratic and peace-loving regime so that it won't become a threat to its neighboring countries and ensure permanent peace and stability across the Strait," Chen said.

"Taiwan's democratic performance has great significance to the 23 million Taiwanese people," and he hopes to create a "lighthouse effect" for the 1.3 billion people in China, Chen said.

US must prepare to face rising China, study says

AFP , WASHINGTON

The US must prepare an effective strategy to face China's rising military power and not freeze at the Asian giant "like a deer in the proverbial headlights," a new study warned on Wednesday.

Beijing's rapid technological advances mean that the US "must plan seriously" for its development of weapons of greater complexity and power, said the study by the Hudson Institute, a Washington-based conservative think tank.

The report, entitled China's New Great Leap Forward: High Technology and Military Power in the Next Half-Century, warned that the US government is too preoccupied with its "war on terror" and democratization of the Middle East and Central Asia.

Meanwhile, Washington is ignoring China's emergence as a top competitor to US technological leadership. Since the Sept. 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks, the US has largely focused on the "cunning, soul-less but essentially low-tech predator: the terrorist," the study said.

"Yet those other realms of warfare that occupied us prior to 9/11 -- information, naval, and above all aerospace -- still constitute the nucleus of the new RMA [revolution in military affairs]," it said.

"If we neglect the timely development of weaponry in these arenas, then China could catch America like a deer in the proverbial headlights -- precisely where we caught them after the 1991 victory in Desert Storm."

The use of surgical bombing and electromagnetic warfare in the Gulf War in 1991 "dramatically demonstrated" the huge chasm between China and the US in modern weapons systems, the report said.

The gap was further displayed in 1996 when two US aircraft carrier battle groups off the coast of Taiwan upstaged Chinese missile exercises with flight combat maneuvers and the monitoring of Chinese military activities on the ground, it said.

The report was unveiled at the US Congress on Wednesday, with a Republican lawmaker warning that the US could not afford to shrug off China's military threat.

Senator Norm Coleman said China's "proliferation of massive numbers of scientists, mathematicians and engineers will have major impact on lessening America's edge in high technology, telecommunications, computing and weaponry, and this challenge cannot be ignored."

Bush defends Iraqi war, use of preemptive strikes

RIGHT DECISION: The US president accepted blame for going to war on faulty intelligence but urged Americans to have patience as Iraqis move toward democracy

AGENCIES , WASHINGTON

One day before Iraq's historic parliamentary elections, US President George W. Bush on Wednesday defended his decision to invade that country and reserved the right to preemptive war in the future.

"In an age of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, if we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long," he said in a speech aimed at shoring up flagging US support for the conflict.

However, he took the blame for going to war in Iraq over faulty intelligence but said he was right to topple former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and urged Americans to be patient as Iraqis vote.

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq, and I am also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities and we're doing just that," he said.

But he said, "My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision" because he was deemed a threat and that regardless, "We are in Iraq today because our goal has always been more than the removal of a brutal dictator."

Bush, who embraced preemptive war as US strategy after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, did not name any potential targets, but said the Iraq vote would put pressure on the governments of Iran and Syria.

"We are living through a watershed moment in the story of freedom," he said. Iraq "will be a model for the Middle East. Freedom in Iraq will inspire reformers from Damascus to Tehran."

Speaking to an invited audience of scholars, members of Congress and diplomats at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a nonpartisan forum for the study of world affairs. Washington, Bush stood firm in resisting calls, largely from Democrats, for a timetable for withdrawal.

US President George W.Bush is introduced to speak about the war in Iraq at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington on Wednesday. Bush vowed the US will stay in Iraq “until victor is achieved ” and he defended his decision to go to war.

Bush's job approval ratings have sunk sharply since his reelection last year because of high gas prices, worries about the economy and growing concerns about Iraq as the US death toll has risen beyond 2,140 soldiers.

In a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released on Wednesday, 60 percent of respondents said they favored a gradual reduction of US troops from Iraq, up 4 percentage points from last month.

In what some political analysts have perceived to be a move by Bush to talk more frankly on the US difficulties in Iraq, Bush also admitted to "tactical mistakes" in an interview with Fox News.

"No question we made some, I would call them, tactical mistakes," he told Fox.

Bush said in his speech that Sunni Arabs, who have fueled the bloody insurgency, were increasingly abandoning violence to take part in their Iraq's politics. He also predicted they would turn out in large numbers yesterday.

Non-Iraqi extremists and Saddam loyalists "lack popular support, and over time, they can be marginalized and defeated by the security forces of a free Iraq," Bush said.

He also warned that violence would continue even after the vote, and laid out how to measure progress towards the day when the US can bring home its troops.

Bush said victory will have been achieved when extremists and Saddam loyalists are no longer a threat to Iraq's democracy, when Iraqi security forces are self-sufficient and when Iraq is not a "safe haven" for terrorists.

"These objectives, not timetables set by politicians in Washington, will drive our force levels in Iraq," Bush said. "We cannot -- and will not -- leave Iraq until victory is achieved."

He acknowledged that the war had sharply divided the US and that intelligence about Saddam's alleged weapons programs had turned out to be false.

But he sharply rebuked "irresponsible" charges that he had deliberately misled the country.

"These charges are pure politics. They hurt the morale of our troops," he declared, saying that even countries which opposed the war agreed that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction.

But US media have quoted French and German intelligence officials in recent weeks as saying that they repeatedly warned Washington that crucial parts of its case for war were flawed or outright false.

Editor's note: the following text is a translation of a speech made by former president Lee Teng-huito the Northern Taiwan Society on Sunday.

As everyone is aware, Taiwan's democracy and freedom were not easily won. Nevertheless, it is quite apparent that reactionary foreign political forces do not want to see the Taiwanese have control over their own country.

Ever since the transition of political power from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 2000, opposition parties have consistently boycotted any laws proposed by the government, regardless of their merit. This sabotage has left the government stranded and has made it almost impossible for this government to achieve anything.

That having been said, even though it is true that this situation has arisen as a result of the opposition's majority in the legislature, we cannot put the blame entirely on their shoulders.

The electorate put their trust in the DPP to take the reins of the country, giving them access to, and control of, all the resources of government. After they won the election, the DPP should have done all they could to work together with the parties they had previously campaigned against, calling on all Taiwanese to give their utmost for the good of the country. Regarding this matter, the DPP has clearly not done very well.

It is not uncommon for the governing party in democratic countries to have a minority in the legislative body. One example of this would be Japan, where the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has been in government for a long time despite the fact that it is not the largest party in the Diet. The fact that the LDP doesn't have a majority of seats, however, has not left Japanese politics in the same situation as in Taiwan.

Faced with the same predicament Japan has prevailed where Taiwan has failed. For this reason we believe that the DPP could have done more. Since they came to power they have been busy trying to secure their own factional interests rather than looking for a way to solve the legislative impasse. It is no wonder that the DPP was dealt an unprecedented blow in the recent three-in-one local elections. This defeat did not come from nowhere, and the Taiwanese people had good reason to deal such a blow to the party.

Since the DPP came to power, they have been saying one thing and doing another, and they have been consistent only in their inconsistency. Over time, the electorate has gradually lost confidence in the DPP.

During last year's legislative elections the DPP campaigned on the issues of the rectification of the national title and the creation of a new constitution. After the election, however, they unexpectedly changed their tune saying that they could not achieve the impossible.

It is clear from this response that they have not really put enough thought into how to make localization a reality, and have sought instead to placate the people with short-sighted policies.

This kind of thinking does not meet the exigencies of the situation. What everyone wants is realistic political policies designed with Taiwan in mind that will pave the way for the kind of future that we want to have.

There are a number of "Taiwan First" policies brought up during election campaigns that the DPP have consistently failed to follow up on. For quite some time now, the party has failed to understand that the people want to see how these localization policies can actually change their lives, tending instead to go round and round in circles spouting abstract slogans.

For the DPP, the road to localization is full of blind spots: from the declaration of the "five noes," to flinching in the face of rectifying the name of Taiwan and writing a new constitution, from the 10-point consensus reached with People First Party Chairman James Soong to the DPP giving their blessing to the visits to China made by Soong and former KMT chairman Lien Chan, and even premier Frank Hsieh's calls to work together with China for a solution and for "one China under the constitution"; all of these see the party orientating itself more with China, putting Taiwan in a new crisis the like of which we have never seen.

Given this situation, how could the electorate feel at ease, how could they not feel angry, how could they not teach the DPP a lesson?

Even though the DPP suffered a heavy defeat in the Dec. 3 elections, we cannot jump to conclusions -- that it will not be able to make a comeback in the next elections. Whether or not it can stage a comeback depends on whether its leadership can take a good hard look at themselves. Faced with such a crucial period, we genuinely hope that the governing DPP can place three guidelines on top of its administrative agenda in order to win back popular support.

First, the DPP has to uphold Taiwanese awareness and eradicate any pro-China ideology that threatens the security of Taiwan.

Second, the party has to take the initiative and strengthen Taiwan's national defense capabilities and resolutely oppose China's military aggression.

Third, it has to protect the economic benefits that Taiwan enjoys and should not seek to "actively open" up to China. Thus, the DPP should consider whether or not it will be appropriate to hold the second Economic Development Advisory Conference next month as planned.

The aforementioned three guidelines clearly suggest that Taiwan is Taiwan, China is China, and that Taiwan has never belonged to China. Nor has China ever exercised jurisdiction over Taiwan. In other words, a distinction between these two nations has to be very clearly drawn.

We hope that the general public can join us in supervising the performance of the DPP using these three guidelines and offer a glimmer of hope to the nation.

I also hold similar views regarding the arms procurement budget that has been blocked 39 times (now 41) in the procedure committee of the legislature. The arms procurement budget includes the cost of submarines, which are indispensable to our national defense. When I served as president, I did all I could to purchase submarines from advanced nations including the US, but to no avail.

Ever since US President George W. Bush came to power, US strategy shifted and he agreed to sell eight submarines to Taiwan. However, the governing DPP did not seek to gain the support of the legislature and rather only intended to bring up the subject prior to elections. That is, the DPP only regards the issue of national defense as one of its election gimmicks and has only provoked resentment among the public and given the opposition more ammunition with which to criticize the government.

That is why the issue of the arms procurement budget has been constantly boycotted by the opposition parties, for it has never been broached when it was supposed to be. Failing to make good use of previous opportunities, it is hardly surprising that the DPP has performed so badly in these most recent elections.

Although the DPP has disappointed the Taiwanese in the way it has dealt with the arms procurement budget, the Taiwanese cannot simply sit back and watch without attempting to do anything. Therefore, the Northern Taiwan Society recently launched a fund-raising activity to urge each national to donate NT$100 to support the arms bill and show our determination to defend our homeland.

This is not an ordinary fund-raising activity, but a declaration of war against reactionary forces and is directed at calling on people to defend our democratic achievements. I hope that we can all make a concerted effort to promote such an activity. I also want to once again call on all Taiwanese to come forward to demonstrate our power and jointly defend our homeland.