Taiwan ‘driving Chinese military goals’
　

PLAYING WITH FIRE: An expert said that a recent incident between Chinese vessels and a US navy submarine surveillance ship was part of a dangerous game of cat and mouse
　

By William Lowther
STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON WITH AFP , BEIJING
Thursday, Mar 12, 2009, Page 1

US National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair told a congressional hearing that “preparations for a Taiwan conflict” still drive the modernization goals of the Chinese military and that the recent naval incidents in the South China Sea were part of a plan by Beijing to expand its influence.

Testifying before a hearing of the Senate Armed Services committee on worldwide threats, Blair said: “Taiwan, as an area of attention in US-China relations, has substantially relaxed. Leaders on both sides of the straits are cautiously optimistic about less confrontational relations.”

“Nonetheless, preparations for a Taiwan conflict drive the modernization goals of the People’s Liberation Army. But in addition to that, China’s security interests are broadening. A full civilian and military space capability, formal capabilities in cyberspace are rapidly developing,” he said.

“China will attempt to develop at least a limited naval projection capability, which is already reflected in anti-piracy operations off the coast of Somalia, and we can talk about the incident that happened recently in the South China Sea,” Blair said.

Washington military circles remain dominated by reports from the US Navy that five Chinese ships harassed the US submarine surveillance vessel USNS Impeccable on Sunday in the latest of seven incidents over the last few days.

On Tuesday, Blair said that the confrontation was the most serious military incident involving the two powers since a US spy plane collided with a Chinese fighter jet near Hainan island in April 2001.

Hans Kristensen, director of the nuclear information project for the Federation of American Scientists, said that it was all part of “a wider and dangerous cat and mouse game between US and Chinese submarines and their hunters.”

Pentagon reports said US surveillance vessels have been “subjected to aggressive behavior, including dozens of fly-bys by Chinese Y-12 maritime surveillance aircraft.”

The incident on Sunday occurred in international waters about 120km south of the Chinese naval base near Yulin on Hainan.

Kristensen says China has started operating new nuclear attack and ballistic missile submarines from the base and the US is “busy collecting data on the submarines and seafloor to improve its ability to detect the submarines in peacetime and more efficiently hunt them in case of war.”

The Federation of American Scientists is reporting that the Impeccable is equipped with the Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System (SURTASS), a passive linear underwater surveillance array attached to a tow cable.

SURTASS was developed as a submarine detection system for deep waters and the US Navy wants to add an active low frequency array to improve long-range detection of submarines in shallow waters.

Intelligence sources say that Impeccable was actually monitoring the Shang-class (Type-093) nuclear-powered attack submarine, a new class China is building to replace the old Han-class and which has recently been seen at the Yulin base.

“The incident begs the question who, or at what level, in the Chinese government was the harassment in international waters ordered,” Kristensen said.

“The incident will make life harder for those in the Obama administration who want to ease the military pressure on US-Chinese relations and easier for hardliners to argue their case,” he said.

The Pentagon said in a statement: “On March 8, 2009, five Chinese vessels shadowed and aggressively maneuvered in dangerously close proximity to USNS Impeccable, in an apparent coordinated effort to harass the US ocean surveillance ship while it was conducting routine operations in international waters.”

China views almost the entire South China Sea as its territory — a claim that is strongly disputed by the US.

The incident came just a week after China and the US resumed military-to-military talks following a five-month suspension over US arms sales to Taiwan.

And it came just as Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi (楊潔箎) arrived in Washington for talks with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, and for meetings at the White House.

The State Department, which has already protested the incident to Beijing, will bring it up again with Yang.

A State Department spokesman said: “I have no way of knowing why the Chinese did what they did. I really don’t know. I can only tell you that we believe we were operating in international waters.”



Democratic Senator Jim Webb, speaking at the Armed Services Committee hearing, said China had begun a new phase in its military development by “beginning to articulate roles and missions that go beyond its immediate territorial interest.”

“I’m very concerned it ties in with the incident that we saw with the naval ship. They have been expanding their military,” he said.

“They claim Taiwan, obviously. They claim the Senkaku Islands, which are between Taiwan and Japan. Japan also has sovereignty over those at the moment. They claim the Paracels, which Vietnam claims. They claim the Spratlys, which Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia claim,” the senator said.

“They claim lost territories basically wherever you can find a piece of Chinese porcelain from 500 years ago,” Webb said.

AGGRESSION

Responding to the senator, Blair said: “As far as the Southeast Asia-South China Sea activities of China, they seem to be more military aggressive. I think that is a trend.”

“I think the debate is still on in China as to whether, as their military power increases, it will be used for good or for pushing people around,” Blair said.

Chinese military chiefs believe the Impeccable was on a spying mission, state media reported yesterday.

“Top military officials lash out at US espionage,” the English-language China Daily newspaper said in a front-page article.

“What was the ship doing? Anyone with eyes can see and our navy can see even more clearly,” the paper quoted Vice Admiral Jin Mao (金矛), former vice commander of the navy, as saying.

VIOLATION

“It’s like a man with a criminal record wandering just outside the gate of a family home. When the host comes out to find out what he is doing there, the man complains that the host had violated his rights,” he was quoted as saying.

The paper also reported that Rear Admiral Zhang Deshun (張德順), deputy chief-of-staff of the navy, had called the US vessel a spy ship, but it did not elaborate.

After the US said overnight it would keep up its naval operations in the international waters of the South China Sea, the Chinese foreign ministry issued a statement repeating its stance that the US Navy was in the wrong.

“China has lodged a solemn representation to the United States as the USNS Impeccable conducted activities in China’s exclusive economic zone in the South China Sea without China’s permission,” ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu (馬朝旭) said.

“We demand that the United States take effective measures to prevent similar acts from happening,” he said in a statement published on the ministry’s Web site.

Chen seeks to summon 34 witnesses, including Lee
　

By Shelley Huang
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Mar 12, 2009, Page 3
　

Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his lawyers yesterday requested that the Taipei District Court summon 34 witnesses during his trial, including former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), former Chinese Nationalist Party chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and Special Investigation Panel (SIP) prosecutor Yueh Fang-ju (越方如).

Yesterday’s pre-trial hearing was scheduled to review evidence and supplementary arguments.

Chen’s lawyers spent most of the morning saying that written depositions by former first lady Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍), former director of Chen’s office, Lin Teh-hsun (林德訓), Presidential Office deputy secretary-general Ma Yung-cheng (馬永成) and former director-general of the Presidential Office’s accounting department Fon Shui-lin (馮瑞麟) were inadmissible because, among other reasons, they did not directly prove Chen was guilty of the crimes listed in the indictment.

Asked by Presiding Judge Tsai Shou-hsun (蔡守訓) for comments on the prosecutors’ supplementary arguments, Chen launched into hours-long answers in his defense.

“The rules say I have to eat bread, only bread, every single day. Is this humane?”
— Chen Shui-bian, former president

Chen said that testimony given by Su Chih-cheng (蘇志誠), a top aide to former president Lee Teng-hui, showed he did not know that the presidential state affairs fund required opening a separate account.

“The president is not a bookkeeper. How would I know how many Sogo gift certificate receipts there are?” Chen said.

He also requested that the court summon witnesses to clarify former presidents’ use of their presidential state affairs fund.

“If President Ma Ying-jeou [馬英九] was found not guilty [of misusing his special allowance during his time as Taipei mayor], then this case shouldn’t encounter any problems,” he said.

To probe Chen’s alleged involvement in embezzlement related to the presidential state affairs fund, Chen’s lawyers requested the court summon Lee and Lien as witnesses.

Chen’s lawyers requested that the court summon Yueh as a witness to investigate whether prosecutors struck a deal with former Chinatrust Financial Holding Co vice chairman Jeffrey Koo Jr (辜仲諒) to persuade him to return to Taiwan and testify against the former first family.

Chen’s lawyer, Shih Yi-ling (石宜琳), requested prosecutor Yueh testify on who arranged her trip to Japan last November, and what prosecutors offered Koo to persuade him to return to Taiwan.

At the start of the hearing, Shih requested that the judges allow Chen’s family to bring him food when he is in court because the district court only provides two pieces of bread to defendants at lunchtime.

Tsai rejected the request, saying: “The court believes that the defendant does not wish to be treated differently from all other defendants.”

Chen replied that his hearing schedule often called for whole-day hearings that are held consecutively, so he often could not make it back to the detention center by dinnertime.

“The rules say I have to eat bread, only bread, every single day. Is this humane?” he asked.

At a separate setting, Taipei District Court spokesperson Huang Chun-ming (黃俊明) said that from now on, the court would provide lunchboxes and dinner for all detained defendants if they have whole-day hearings scheduled.

Important lessons from Hong Kong
　

By Paul Lin 林保華
Thursday, Mar 12, 2009, Page 8

‘When it comes to judicial independence and respect for the media, the Taiwanese government is lagging far behind Hong Kong, despite Hong Kong having already returned to Chinese rule.’

The National People’s Congress (NPC) and the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference met recently. While meeting NPC representatives from Hong Kong on March 7, Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平), who is in charge of affairs pertaining to Hong Kong and Macau, warned that the economic crisis was worsening and that Hong Kong had been too passive in its response.

Not surprisingly, Xi called on the Hong Kong representatives to support the Special Administrative Region’s (SAR) government, which is headed by Chief Executive Donald Tsang (曾蔭權).

Hong Kong commentators have said that the two meetings are venues for criticizing and monitoring the government in China. Xi, whose performance should have been monitored at these meetings, however, turned things on their head by pointing a finger at the Hong Kong representatives. Even more important is the fact that according to Hong Kong’s Basic Law, Hong Kong should enjoy a high degree of autonomy in all areas aside from affairs related to diplomacy and security, and that at no level should the central government interfere in Hong Kong’s autonomy.

So just what does Xi’s open criticism mean for Hong Kong?

On Feb. 25, the Hong Kong government announced a budget of HK$18.8 billion (US$2.42 billion) to help solve its economic woes. Some pundits said this was too little. However, the government responded by saying that giving out money was not the best way to help the economy, but rather a short-term remedy and a way of appeasing people. Hong Kong Financial Secretary John Tsang (曾俊華) said the government did not exclude the possibility of expanding the scope of such measures in the mid-term.

This means that the government would keep some money back in case of emergencies — if the economic situation were to worsen, for example.

During the Asian financial crisis in 1997 and 1998, John Tsang spent more than US$10 billion in governmental financial reserves to ease the damage, a measure that proved successful. From his past actions, we can clearly see that Hong Kong’s leaders have more experience in handling crises than Xi.

Donald Tsang’s predecessor, Tung Chee-hwa (董建華), was widely criticized as being incompetent and overly reliant on Beijing. He was also famous for saying how Hong Kong would prosper as long as China prospered. However, the result of this policy was that China prospered while Hong Kong decayed, with almost 1 million people hitting the streets over security legislation and forcing Beijing to replace Tung with Donald Tsang. “Patriots” in Hong Kong view Tsang as a leftover of British rule, but the truth of the matter is that this British-trained civil servant is much more flexible and capable of dealing with issues than his predecessor.

Tsang has also showed himself to be more sensitive to social issues and more concerned with public opinion.

Of course, Beijing remains the source of Tsang’s power and he must be loyal to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This puts him in a sticky situation, as he is forced to keep a distance from Hong Kong’s “patriots,” which makes it difficult for him to please all the parties involved.

Neither Tung nor Tsang have dared interfere with the independence of Hong Kong’s judiciary. Beijing’s insistence that Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal explain, on three separate occasions, the legal basis of its decisions clearly shows how Beijing is interfering with Hong Kong’s affairs. Other examples can be seen from how Tung was forced to resign over controversies surrounding Article 23 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law, or the public Radio Television Hong Kong’s (RTHK) running some anti-CCP programs that were strongly criticized by “patriots.” Neither Tung nor Tsang dared do anything rash about the matter because they had to respect the principle of editorial autonomy at RTHK. In the end, they used financial audits to force a minor change, but they remained very careful in handling the renewal of personnel.

These show that even though CCP officials may apply pressure and tamper with Hong Kong’s affairs, lower-level government officials and Hong Kong’s society in general do posses a certain amount of power to keep the CCP in check. Of course, another factor in this equation is that Beijing has to make a good show for Taiwan and is therefore limited in what it can do in Hong Kong. This is one point that everybody must keep in mind when it comes to the CCP.

Just after Chinese emissary Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) visited Taiwan in November, a friend in Hong Kong asked me: “Why are you [Taiwan] being taken over by China even quicker than Hong Kong?”

This awakened an interest in drawing the differences between Hong Kong and Taiwan.

When it comes to judicial independence and respect for the media, the Taiwanese government is lagging far behind Hong Kong, despite Hong Kong having already returned to Chinese rule. This is because Hong Kong was under British rule for 150 years and as a result inherited a more complete set of social regulations. Freedom, human rights, the independence of the judiciary and administrative neutrality are ingrained in the minds of Hong Kong’s civil servants. These are not things the CCP can easily remove within a short period of time.

Compared with British Hong Kong, Taiwan was ruled by the Japanese for a short period. After that, it was ruled by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which derived its style of rule from a hierarchical, Confucian concept of governance. This is why the KMT believes it owns the courts and why President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) may at times sound like he worships dictators like Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤).

Since Ma became president, government officials have literally been falling over themselves to kowtow to China.

Taiwanese must therefore be alert to the risk of a new 228 Incident as a means to eliminate Taiwanese independence, which would bring disastrous results for Taiwan. Legislators from the KMT want to expand the rights to investigate personal data, which raises the question of whether they are trying to prepare files for Taiwanese individuals to hand over to the CCP. Time is running out and if Taiwanese do not step up to the plate, it will be too late.

Paul Lin is a political commentator.