Wu met with
second CPPCC member
DETAILS, DETAILS: The new
premier had not mentioned meeting Peter Kwok in earlier accounts of the Hong
Kong trip, but a photograph showed them outside a restaurant
By Loa Iok-sin and
Mo Yan-chih
STAFF REPORTERS
Friday, Sep 18, 2009, Page 1
Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) yesterday acknowledged meeting Peter Kwok (郭炎), a
member of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), in
Hong Kong earlier this month, but denied knowing his political status and
insisted he visited the territory to learn about mudslide prevention.
Wu acknowledged his meeting with Kwok on Sept. 5 after the Chinese-language
Apple Daily yesterday carried the story with a photo showing Wu standing with
Kwok outside a restaurant in central Hong Kong preparing to leave after
apparently having a meal together.
Before the picture surfaced yesterday, Wu and the Executive Yuan only admitted
that Wu had met with convener of the Executive Council of Hong Kong, Leung Chun-ying
(梁振英), who is also a CPPCC member and speculated by Hong Kong media to be
Beijing’s favored candidate for Hong Kong’s next chief executive. Wu said that
they only discussed mudslide prevention.
At the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislative and administrative affairs
meeting yesterday, Wu showed several letters from Leung and Hong Kong’s Chung
Hwa Travel Service, and explained the matter in front of President Ma Ying-jeou
(馬英九), KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄), government officials and party
legislators.
Wu said Chung Hwa Travel Service sent a letter of invitation on behalf of Leung
on Aug. 10 for a discussion on mudslide prevention, and Leung sent a letter on
Aug. 20 to thank him for accepting the invitation.
Wu, accompanied by his wife and son, met with Leung for lunch at the Jackson
Room on Sept. 5, and Leung introduced Kwok as a personal friend to Wu later in
the afternoon, he said.
Wu said that he then accompanied his son to a fortune teller and a dinner with
his son’s boss.
He returned to Taiwan early in the morning on Sept. 6, he said.
“I only knew that Mr Kwok was a businessman ... I took the trip before
confirming with the president my decision to take over as premier,” the premier
said.
On Sept. 3 and Sept. 4, Ma talked with Wu about appointing him as premier. Wu
left for Hong Kong on Sept. 5 and returned the following afternoon before the
Presidential Office announced Wu would take office on Sept. 7.
Wu dismissed the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) accusations that he made
the trip to gain approval for his premiership from China, while arguing that he
has stood firm on Taiwan-centric principles whenever he met Chinese officials.
“As a former KMT secretary-general, I’ve already met many high-level Chinese
officials in the past, and I’ve always put Taiwan’s interest first when meeting
them,” he said.
Wu, however, refused to discuss the content of his meeting with Kwok when asked
by the press yesterday. He said he felt “distressed” by challenges posed by the
accusations, but added that he would be willing to be examined by the
legislature and the public as premier.
Ma later gave his support to Wu, and said Wu had told him about his trip to Hong
Kong on Sept. 4.
“He told me that he wanted to understand the way Hong Kong handled mudslide
prevention, and it was a good thing as our nation suffered from serious
mudslides,” he said.
Wu said he did not clarify the matter earlier because he thought it would be
unnecessary to explain a personal trip.
The picture with Kwok drew yet more criticism from DPP legislators yesterday.
“Wu told us that he only met with Leung in Hong Kong, and now we find out about
another meeting,” DPP Legislator Yeh Yi-chin (葉宜津) told a news conference
yesterday.
“You [Wu] said you don’t have to tell us about the itineraries of your wife and
your children [in Hong Kong] — sorry, but we don’t care about your wife and your
children’s itineraries, what we care about are your honesty and allegiance, the
Premier of the Republic of China,” Yeh said.
Yeh was referring to remarks that Wu made on Wednesday when responding to media
questions about the details of his Hong Kong trip.
At the time, he told reporters that he was a “free man” before taking the
premiership and thus did not have to reveal every detail of his trip or the
itineraries of his wife and children who accompanied him on the trip.
“I wonder what else Wu has not told us?” Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)
Legislator Chiu Yi-ying (邱議瑩) said.
Several pieces of seemingly contradictory information about Wu’s trip to Hong
Kong have emerged.
Wu said last Friday that he went to Hong Kong on Leung’s invitation to learn
about mudslide prevention techniques, but said on Wednesday that he took the
initiative to contact Leung.
While Wu initially said that he went to Hong Kong to “learn [about mudslide
prevention] from [Hong Kong’s] Civil Engineering Development Department [CEDD]”
through arrangements made by Leung, he said on Wednesday that he didn’t mean he
personally visited the department. Rather, he asked Leung to hand relevant
documents from the department to him while he was in Hong Kong.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) told KMT lawmakers at a dinner on Sept. 11 that Wu
visited the CEDD at his suggestion, however, Wu said that Ma only suggested that
he visit a subordinate agency under the CEDD and he did not go because it was
the weekend.
DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said Wu was stranded in a “crisis of
confidence” because he did not tell the full story.
“If Wu did not do anything the public should not know, he should honestly tell
the public about everything he did [during his trip to Hong Kong],” Tsai said.
“This has nothing to do with Wu’s personal freedom, but as a key political
figure who visited a sensitive place at a sensitive time, the public has the
right to question, and he is obliged to clarify.”
KMT Legislator Wu Yu-sheng (吳育昇) yesterday urged the DPP to stop focusing on
Wu’s Hong Kong trip, saying that before Wu became premier, it was his right to
travel anywhere he wanted.
According to a poll released by the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) yesterday,
57.36 percent of the respondents said they do not believe Wu’s account of the
trip, while 69.44 percent said Wu should give a more detailed explanation.
The poll was conducted from Monday to Wednesday by telephone with 1,067 valid
samples collected.
Security
conference speakers emphasize strong Taiwan ties
By William Lowther
STAFF REPORTER, WASHINGTON
Friday, Sep 18, 2009, Page 1
US Admiral Timothy Keating旧 remarks on Tuesday that China could break off
military-to-衫ilitary exchanges with the US if Washington sells advanced F-16 C/D
fighter planes to Taiwan may have grabbed the headlines, but other attendees at
the conference stressed the importance of maintaining strong ties with Taiwan in
the face of Chinese threats.
Addressing a conference earlier this week on security in the Asia-Pacific,
Keating, the head of US Pacific Command, said there was a 対air likelihood� the
break would be made, adding: 戦 hope they don急 react that way. I hope they will
take a longer-term view. Our country旧 policy on Taiwan has been on the books
since 1979. It旧 hardly new and I don急 think there旧 going to be any change to our
policy as to whether or not we announce another arms sale � that旧 an entirely
different matter.�
Keating refused to give an opinion as to whether the F-16 sale would go through,
saying that the decision would be made at a much higher level.
He said, however, that the US had just resumed military-to-衫ilitary dialogue
with China after it was suspended by Beijing last October, immediately after
Washington announced the last Taiwan arms sales package.
巣e are anxious to continue this dialogue, to do our best not to have it again
suspended for whatever reason,� the admiral said.
Speaking at the same conference, organized by the 苦ashington-based Center for
Strategic and International Studies, Frank Jannuzi, East Asia adviser to the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said: 戦 wouldn急 put so much confidence in
the current goodwill and charm offensive going on between Taipei and Beijing.
There are still some fundamental differences in long-term perspective and about
how the Taiwan question is going to be resolved, and when, and with what
ultimate outcome.�
戦 wonder if we ought not to be focusing as much attention on building a strong
security partnership with Taiwan as we are with reaching out to China, to make
sure that we remain balanced and in position to defend our security interests
there,� he said.
James Kitfield, security and foreign affairs correspondent for the National
Journal, said that even though China still had large numbers of missiles aimed
at Taiwan, it had 臓acked off� from its belligerent position.
He said: 戦 was at a breakfast with Admiral Keating before this event and he said
the pace of those deployments across the Taiwan Strait � although they have not
been removed � has slowed considerably.�
Kitfield added: 窃on急 think that you can get closer and closer military ties to
Taiwan and not upset China because we挙e learned that is impossible to do.�
荘he key thing to understand about the Taiwan-China military balance is that no
amount of arms sales to Taiwan is ever going to give Taiwan the capability to
defeat China. The entire exercise is one of deterrence � it旧 one of trying to
ensure that the Taiwanese are a hard enough target that the Chinese are
dissuaded from any adventurism,� Jannuzi replied.
浅aving said that, you look at the arms package that旧 already been approved for
sale to Taiwan and the fact that Taiwan has not yet proceeded to fully implement
that package, and I think a reasonable person would say, now is not the time to
be rushing into new arms sales to Taiwan,� he said.
Jannuzi, a member of the majority Democratic Party congressional staff, added:
戦観 not hearing on Capitol Hill a groundswell of pressure on the Obama
administration to do more on arms sales to Taiwan. I think that people look at
the political rapprochement that is underway between Beijing and Taipei, and
they take some comfort from that.�
But former State Department official Randall Schriver insisted there was some 庁rgency�
in supporting Taiwan.
He said: 荘here旧 an inclination to give the Chinese credit for slowing the pace
of the build-up, but the build-up is continuing. In and of itself, that旧 a
pretty remarkable thing given the diplomacy and the improved political
environment and the fact that Taiwan has essentially taken an acquisition
holiday.�
繊ur arms sales to Taiwan are not a deterrent to cross-strait interactions or
diplomacy, they are actually to help Taiwan to have the confidence to go to the
negotiating table and to engage in diplomacy in a consequential way without a
gun to their head,� he said.
Judge
questions Ma’s reported criticism
By Shelley
Huang
STAFF REPORTER, WITH STAFF WRITER
Friday, Sep 18, 2009, Page 3
“I hope President Ma can clarify [what he said]. If President Ma does not
issue a clarification, I will reserve my right to pursue legal action.”— Hung
Ying-hua, Shilin District Court judge
Shilin District Court Judge Hung Ying-hua (洪英花), who has been critical of
procedural aspects of former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) corruption trial,
yesterday expressed regret over President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) reported
dismissal of her criticism as a violation of legal ethics.
Hung was responding to media reports that quoted Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)
Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) relaying comments Ma had reportedly made during a dinner
with KMT lawmakers on Wednesday night.
“I hope President Ma can clarify [what he said],” Hung said. “If President Ma
does not issue a clarification, I will reserve my right to pursue legal action.”
In December, a panel of judges ordered that Judge Chou Chan-chun (周占春) be
replaced by Judge Tsai Shou-hsun (蔡守訓) in the corruption and money laundering
trial of the former president and 12 co-defendants. The switch elicited
speculation that the decision was procedurally flawed and politically motivated.
In articles published in local media, Hung has said that the switching of judges
was illegal, rendering the guilty verdicts Tsai handed down on Friday invalid.
Some KMT lawmakers have described Hung’s comments and criticism of the Chen case
as “audacious.”
In response to Hung’s criticism, the Judicial Yuan said yesterday that judges
should be careful what they say.
Minister of Justice Wang Ching‑feng (王清峰) said she respected Hung’s right to
freedom of speech, but that it was up to the Judicial Yuan to decide whether her
outspokenness was appropriate.
Asked for comment, Judicial Yuan Secretary-General Hsieh Wen-ting (謝文定) did not
give a direct answer.
However, Hsieh said that according to the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, which
all judges in the country must adhere to, a judge should have high moral
standards, be prudent in speech and action, and exercise self-control and
integrity.
Court must
rule on Diane Lee’s salary: speaker
By Flora Wang
STAFF REPORTER
Friday, Sep 18, 2009, Page 3
The question of recovering the salary paid to former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)
legislator Diane Lee (李慶安), who has been indicted on fraud charges, is out of
the legislature’s hands, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng said yesterday.
“It has not yet been determined whether she is guilty of the charges,” Wang told
reporters at the legislature.
“If the court finds her guilty and rules that her salary constituted illegal
gains, the court would confiscate the money and we would not have to take any
action to recover it,” Wang said. “If the court does not find her salary
illegal, there would be no need to recover the money. We will see what happens.”
Wang said Lee’s endorsement of bills during her legislative terms would remain
valid despite her indictment.
CITIZENSHIP
Taipei prosecutors on Tuesday indicted Lee on fraud and forgery charges on
suspicion of deliberately concealing dual citizenship while holding public
office.
Prosecutors alleged Lee had deliberately left blank the field asking whether she
held citizenship of a country other than the Republic of China in the personnel
forms she filled out as a Taipei City councilor in 1994 and during her terms as
a legislator since 1998.
Prosecutors also allege that more than NT$100 million (US$3 million) in income
Lee earned during her terms as councilor and lawmaker were gained via illegal
means, since she obtained the seats while holding dual citizenship.
The money includes NT$22.68 million in income from her term as a city councilor
and NT$80.09 million from three terms as a legislator.
Lee’s US citizenship came into the spotlight in March last year after the
Chinese-language Next Magazine reported that she still possessed a US passport.
The Nationality Act (國籍法) prohibits government officials from holding dual
citizenship, requiring dual citizens to give up their foreign citizenship before
assuming office.
In January, the Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office received official
confirmation from the US Department of State that Lee’s US citizenship remained
valid.
She resigned from the KMT in December and stepped down as a legislator early
this year. The Central Election Commission in February revoked Lee’s membership
in the seventh Taipei City Council and the fourth, fifth and sixth Legislative
Yuan, and annulled all her election certificates from 1994 to 2005.
Lee’s lawyer Lee Yung-ran (李永然) told reporters on Tuesday that his client was
shocked to learn of the indictment.
RECOVERING MONEY
Independent Taipei City Councilor Chen Chien-ming (陳建銘) said yesterday he would
file a provisional proposal on Monday demanding that the Taipei City Council
recover the NT$22.68 million paid to Diane Lee during her term as a city
councilor.
The proposal would need the approval of one-third of the city council.
Ma calls on
civil servants to be mindful of human rights
By Shelley Huang
STAFF REPORTER
Friday, Sep 18, 2009, Page 3
Civil servants must put themselves in the public’s shoes and bear civil rights
in mind as they perform their duties to help deepen democracy in the country,
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said yesterday.
Ma was speaking at the launch of a Ministry of Justice program to train 2,400
civil servants as part of the implementation of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights.
The legislature ratified the international covenants on March 31.
Most civil servants don’t know what constitutes a human rights violation, Ma
said. He urged government employees to be mindful of people’s rights in order to
minimize the possibility of human rights violations in the country.
“When your rights are being protected, you may not notice it, but if your rights
are being infringed upon, you would definitely feel it,” he told officials
gathered at the launch.
Ma urged government employees to think about how they would feel if their rights
were being violated.
The president said he had great respect for civil servants’ contribution to
enhancing democracy in Taiwan, saying they have helped make the country the most
mature society in the Mandarin-speaking world in terms of democracy, freedom and
the rule of law.
Ma said that, since he took office, the number of warrants obtained by
investigators allowing them to listen in on telecommunications has decreased by
70 percent, in an effort to minimize rights violations.
However, Ma said, this was not enough, because the concept of human rights
protection should reach all levels of the civil service.
Ma: trust
through competence
Friday, Sep 18, 2009, Page 8
The new Cabinet is only a few days old and already the competence of the premier
is under scrutiny over his brief, but bizarre, trip to Hong Kong. Ostensibly a
fact-finding trip on landslide prevention technology, it turns out that Wu Den-yih
(吳敦義) spent a good proportion of his time meeting Chinese powerbrokers in the
Special Administrative Region — and, believe it or not, taking time out to
accompany his son on a spot of fortune telling.
Fittingly, none of this augurs well. Whatever initial period of grace existed
for the new premier has expired with this sloppily executed slice of
cross-strait diplomacy. With Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators
howling over reports by the Apple Daily in Hong Kong and Taiwan on Wu’s
unannounced itinerary, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) must be wondering what he
has to do to find a politically astute person to run the Executive Yuan.
Ma has previously “delegated responsibility” — let’s be euphemistic — to the
Cabinet on sensitive domestic issues based on what he perceives to be a
constitutional separation of powers.
It would be intriguing, therefore, if Wu was serving as Ma’s emissary. From Ma’s
and China’s perspective, what does Wu have that Ma’s other negotiators and party
colleagues lack?
As Ma prepares to take over the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairmanship
next month, party and legislative tensions over how things are being run are in
check — just. Even the discordant voices that exist on the pan-blue side of
politics — KMT Legislator Lo Shu-lei (羅淑蕾) is a good example — remain largely
supportive of the president.
This may not last much longer. Typhoon Morakot, the Deaflympics, the World Games
in Kaohsiung, the swine flu outbreak and the trial of former president Chen
Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his co-accused have helped to obscure this government’s
struggle to make an impression in the more mundane aspects of day-to-day policy
development and implementation.
There is, indeed, much about the way that this country is being run that is
crying out for critique and overhaul. However, when a government is on the back
foot, as this one is, more provocative reforms tend to be traded for the comfort
of vulnerable legislators.
With the Ma administration, there is a significant deviation from this pattern.
Cross-strait detente demands ongoing negotiations that please China, regardless
of what anyone thinks back home. To continue along this road, it is essential
that Ma’s Cabinet deliver results across all portfolios to ensure that DPP
accusations of domestic neglect are neutralized.
Perhaps this is what Ma was getting at yesterday when he asked that civil
servants bear the rights of ordinary people in mind. If the government cannot
attract public support on issues as fundamental as basic policy, parity,
respectful treatment and due process, then what hope will trade-offs with China
have?
Ma’s problem — and it has always been his problem — is that his pretty language
has rarely been backed by action when it comes to reforming the behavior of
people under his command. His challenge now is not to reform the lowest ranking
people on the civil servant scale, but to make something competent out of the
people at the very top.
Media myth
lives on
Friday, Sep 18, 2009,
Page 8
Monday marks the 10th anniversary of the 921 Earthquake of 1999. Members of
rescue teams who came to Taiwan’s aid after the quake have been invited to
attend a series of commemorative events this week.
On Sept. 25, 1999, four days after the earthquake, the Taipei Times ran an
article entitled “Taipei accuses China of exploiting quake.” The newspaper
followed the government and Chinese-language media in reporting “a Russian
earthquake relief mission en route to Taiwan was forced to make a lengthy detour
over Siberia because China refused to allow the Russian plane carrying the team
to pass through its airspace.”
On April 1 this year, the Taipei Times reported that “a group of Russian search
and rescue workers that helped local teams during the 921 Earthquake in 1999
will come to Taiwan this September to take part in an event commemorating the
10th anniversary of the quake ... At the time, Russia dispatched a group of 83
professional search-and-rescue personnel to help in the search for survivors.
Because of China’s refusal to allow Russian planes to fly through its airspace,
the help was delayed for 12 hours.”
I must point out that this accusation, though widely believed by people in
Taiwan, is untrue.
When the accusation first appeared in the media, I felt doubtful for three
reasons. First, different media disagreed widely about the length of the delay.
Second, according to my understanding of relations between Russia, China and
Taiwan, I thought it unlikely that China would refuse such a request. Third, the
source of the report was said to be a Russian-language newspaper Segodnya
(Today). I found this odd because it is very rare for Taiwanese media to report
stories from the Russian media, especially when the original article is in
Russian.
Out of curiosity, I visited the Russian trade office on Xinyi Road to ask
whether the reports were true. The Russian trade representative and other staff
said they had not heard of it.
The Russian representative said: “Not everything you read in the newspapers is
always true.”
He explained that he had played a key role in facilitating the rescue mission.
He assured me that the Russian team had never requested to fly through Chinese
air space, since the quickest and most efficient way for them to come here was
to follow their established domestic route from Moscow to the Russian Far East,
and from there across the sea to Taiwan.
He said the route from Russia to Taiwan was registered with international
aviation authorities, although it was not in commercial use. It had only been
used once before, for a private flight to Taiwan by Russian politician Vladimir
Zhirinovsky (who visited Taiwan from Oct. 18 to Oct. 22, 1998.)
The trade representative said China could not have refused permission for the
Russian plane to fly over China, because the Russians never made any such
request.
Following those reports in 1999, however, Taiwanese politicians, including then
foreign minister Jason Hu (胡志強) and then Taoyuan County commissioner Annette Lu
(呂秀蓮), publicly condemned China for its supposed callousness in delaying the
Russian rescue mission,.
The incident was cited as a pretext for refusing material aid, such as tents,
prefabricated houses and so on, from China, and turning down Beijing’s offer to
send a medical team, although a cash donation from China was accepted.
Incidentally, Taiwan also refused aid offered by the Philippines.
After leaving the Russian trade office, I told what I had heard to Time
magazine’s Taiwan correspondent Donald Shapiro, and called in to Li Ao’s (李敖)
television call-in program and another call-in program on radio.
On Oct. 1, 1999, Taiwan’s representative office in Moscow invited members of the
rescue team, who had just returned to Russia, to dinner.
Arkady Borisov, Moscow correspondent of the China Times, asked the rescue team
whether it was true that they had been refused passage through Chinese airspace.
Team leader Vladimir Boreiko replied that it was not true, and proceeded to give
the same account that the Russian representative in Taipei gave to me. This
report appeared in the China Times on Oct. 3, 1999, and is still available
online.
These are the facts of the matter as far as I know. Anyone who is still in doubt
will have a chance to ask the Russian rescue team members during their visit to
Taiwan this week.
JULIAN CLEGG
Taipei
The Dalai
Lama is no bogeyman
By Sushil Seth
Friday, Sep 18, 2009, Page 8
The Dalai Lama’s recent Taiwan visit was comforting to its typhoon-ravaged
people. But it infuriated China. An official spokesman in Beijing commented:
“Under the pretext of religion, he has all along been engaged in separatist
activities,” adding: “Obviously, this is not for the sake of disaster relief.
It’s an attempt to sabotage the hard-earned good situation in cross-strait
relations.”
Considering that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has been bending over backward to
please China, he made some hard political calculations when allowing the Dalai
Lama’s visit.
Ma was losing political ground to the Democratic Progressive Party from the
torrent of criticism in the country over his administration’s tardy response to
the devastating tragedy of Typhoon Morakot.
And knowing how close the Ma administration is to China, it must have explained
to Beijing its need to contain political damage that might worsen if the Dalai
Lama was refused the opportunity to visit Taiwan in his role of imparting
spiritual solace. Beijing might not have found it satisfactory but the thought
of another DPP comeback at some point must be sobering.
Morakot killed more than 700 people, destroyed property and dislocated
communities.
In the midst of all this destruction, the government seemed unsure how best to
respond, as if the gravity of the situation had not sunk in.
On such occasions, when Nature’s wrath strikes and the government is woefully
incompetent and inadequate, people’s minds turn to spiritual nourishment. The
local leaders were more responsive to their people’s need for some sort of
spiritual comfort at a time of tremendous grief, which led them to invite the
Dalai Lama to serve that need.
Whether or not they were politically motivated is not the issue here. The issue
is that they spotted the dire need for spiritual solace and decided that the
Dalai Lama was the one to fit that role. And he played that role with great
aplomb and sincerity, judging from the people’s enthusiasm at his meetings.
Indeed, China too, in its present state of obsessive greed and consequent
moral-spiritual void, could use the Dalai Lama in such a role for the good of
its people. China’s ruling oligarchy, however, has so demonized him that they
refuse to see any role for him. For them he is a separatist, a political monk
and a traitor, at worst.
And what has he done to deserve these epithets? Simply seek autonomy for Tibet
as part of China, which translates into an autonomous Tibet being able to deal
with its regional affairs, while the central government in Beijing controls its
defense, foreign dealings and currency.
With such sovereign control over Tibet, is it possible to imagine that it would
pose a threat to China’s territorial integrity? In a country of 1.3 billion
people, an autonomous Tibet’s population of about 6 million will be a tiny
minority.
If Beijing can be paranoid on this score, then there is something seriously
wrong about the polity and psychology of such a state.
Indeed, judging by the Dalai Lama’s public pronouncements, he comes out as a
very pragmatic man. For instance, he is always hosing down the hotheads in the
Tibetan Youth Congress who advocate independence for Tibet.
The Dalai Lama has reportedly said: “But I always ask them: How are you going to
attain independence? Where are you going to get the weapons? How are you going
to pay for them? How are you going to send them into Tibet? They have no
answer.”
This is certainly not a guy who has some delusion of grandeur about Tibet’s
capacity to become independent through an armed struggle with China.
He acknowledges China’s great power role. They already have the “manpower,
military power [and] monetary power.” But, he says, “Moral power, moral
authority is lacking.”
In other words, China would need some moral and spiritual foundation to underpin
its heedless and relentless pursuit of greed. Because, in its absence, it will
lose its social and cultural cohesion and bring on itself the social chaos that
its leadership professes to fear so much.
And for this, China can certainly use the Dalai’s Lama’s moral authority.
Pico Iyer, who has studied the Dalai Lama over the decades, says: “the Dalai
Lama has always been adept at pointing out, logically, how Tibet’s interests and
China’s converge — bringing geopolitics and Buddhist principles together.”
China, therefore, should tap his spiritual and moral authority and make him a
partner in its moral regeneration. This, however, would require them to stop
demonizing him as some sort of evil phenomenon.
An autonomous Tibet might give some substance to China’s otherwise phony claim
of ethnic and cultural diversity.
Beijing should stop waiting for the Dalai Lama to die and replace him with their
own compliant nominee. Indeed, in his death, he might become a more potent
symbol of retrieving Tibet’s identity, with not inconsiderable public support
internationally.
At 73, the Dalai Lama is still going strong. If Beijing can get over its
pathological hatred of him, he might be able to play a useful role in broadening
and humanizing China’s image. And with his considerable spiritual following in
Taiwan, he might even be able to play a useful bridging role with China.
The point is that Beijing’s paranoid leadership needs to relax and let Taiwan
breathe freely.
Even with a broadly shared culture, people can still decide to live as separate
nations. Take the case of Australia and New Zealand. They have the best of
relations as separate countries with a shared cultural heritage.
Why can’t China feel more confident with an independent Taiwan, with both
countries deepening their shared cultural, trade and other activities?
Granting autonomy to Tibet might be the first step to make China feel more at
ease.
Sushil Seth is a writer based in
Australia.
Ma ignores
Constitution with new election plan
By Wu Ping-jui 吳秉叡
Friday, Sep 18, 2009, Page 8
‘How many governmental levels are there in Taiwan? How can such an overlapping,
multi-layered system do anything to reduce social costs?’
After a recent meeting between Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators and
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Ma proposed legal amendments to extend the terms
of current mayors and county commissioners to five years and postpone this
December’s mayoral and county commissioner elections to next year. The idea was
to synchronize the mayoral and county commissioner elections with the election
of the mayors of special municipalities at the end of next year. The rationale
was to reduce the number of elections and their financial and social costs. This
may sound reasonable, but it is problematic.
First, the year-end mayoral and county commissioner elections were officially
announced by the Central Election Commission on Sept. 4, which said the terms
would be four years. Under social contract theory, the terms of the contract
with voters have already clearly stated that the terms for officials elected in
the year-end elections would be four years and that this cannot be changed. It
now seems, however, that the KMT, with its absolute legislative majority, can
change laws as it see fit.
The Council of Grand Justices’ Constitutional Interpretation No. 499 states:
“Therefore, the appropriateness of a democracy through representation lies in
whether its public representatives execute their powers in accordance with those
which were bestowed upon them and abide by their contracts with their
electorate. One of the most critical aspects of this agreement is that, unless
there is any proper reason for doing otherwise, an election must be held prior
to the expiration of the term or there shall no longer be representation.”
The same also applies to the election of government officials. It is thus
obvious that amending laws to extend the terms in office of the next mayors and
county commissioners is in violation of the prescriptions of Constitutional
Interpretation No. 499 and thus is unconstitutional.
The best solution would be to amend the law to reduce the terms of the mayors
and councilors of special municipalities to be elected next year to three years,
so that the elections for all local leaders could be combined in 2013. There is
enough time to do this, it would not raise questions of unconstitutionality and
it achieves the goal of combined elections.
Second, Taiwan’s system of local government autonomy is a mess. At the end of
this year, townships will elect township heads and representatives, but there
are no elections for special municipalities. How many governmental levels are
there in Taiwan? How can such an overlapping, multi-layered system do anything
to reduce social costs?
By the end of next year Taiwan will have five special municipalities. But do we
have any national land planning?
These points show that Ma does not think ahead and that he lacks an overall plan
for ruling this nation. I implore Ma to try harder and to stop treating the
Constitution with disdain.
Wu Ping-jui, a former legislator, heads
the Democratic Progressive Party’s Taipei County branch.