20040602

The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) urged China yesterday not to mix politics with business in response to an editorial in the Communist Party's mouthpiece People's Daily that Beijing does not welcome pro-Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) businesspeople.

The editorial accused Hsu Wen-lung, the founder of the Chi Mei Corporation, for making money in China to fund the DPP and publicly calling for Taiwan's independence.

MAC Chairman Joseph Wu said that Beijing should keep its promises, noting that on May 24 it encouraged cross-strait trade and exchanges.

China has a political motive in ordering its official media outlet to carry a front-page editorial attacking Hsu, who is also a senior advisor to President Chen Shui-bian , MAC Vice Chairman Chiu Tai-san said.

The council is watching to see whether the attack on Hsu is an isolated case, Chiu said.

From left to right, DPP Legislator Chang Ching-fang and legislative caucus whip Tsai Huang-liang -- along with Kao Wei-pang, the founder of an association aimed at helping Taiwan's businesspeople whose rights have been damaged in China -- yesterday protest against China's oppression of pro-independence Taiwanese businesspeople.

"Beijing has said it would not politicize trade issues. It should abide by its word and protect Taiwanese businesspeople's investments in China, rather than causing unnecessary trouble for them," Chiu said.

Hsu said yesterday he was not surprised Beijing has again singled him out for character assassination. After the 2000 presidential election, Hsu's petrochemical plant in Jiangsu Province encountered problems with unannounced "audits" and "environmental management" inspections from Chinese officials.

"Beijing has said it would not politicize trade issues. It should abide by its word and protect Taiwanese businesspeople's investments."

Chiu Tai-san, MAC vice chairman

"I respect China's right to exercise its freedom of speech. But for the benefit of global economic development, I wish Beijing could separate politics from trade in handling its relationship with Taiwan," the businessman said.

To boost the competitiveness of Taiwanese businesses based in China, Hsu has been lobbying for the implementation of the three cross-strait direct links -- trade, transportation and postal services.

Hsu also defended himself against the newspaper's accusation that he used money he made in China to further his "other aims."

"Decades ago, Taiwan's cheap labor attracted US and Japanese companies to use Taiwan as a production base. Their investment helped create an economic miracle in Taiwan," said Hsu.

"Now Taiwan is using China and Vietnam as production bases. That should create win-win situations for Taiwan, China and Vietnam. Cross-strait trade will only suffer if Taiwan and China keep emphasizing their political differences," he added.

Frank Liao, chairman of the Chi Mei Group, said in a statement: "The Chi Mei Group cannot comment on Mr. Hsu's personal political beliefs. We have maintained a neutral stance in running our businesses, and have avoided any political considerations."

"Many years ago, Mr. Hsu decided to retire at the age of 70. He resigned from the Chi Mei Corporation on May 10, and plans to retire as chairman of Chi Mei Optoelectronics on June 15," Liao said.

Wang Ya-kang , secretary-general of the Chinese National Federation of Industries, the members of which have investments in China, said it remains to be seen whether the report would affect pro-DPP Taiwanese businesspeople's operations in China.

"We need to observe whether China's policies towards Taiwanese businesspeople will be in line with what the report said ... We wish politics would not be mixed with business," Wang said.

The DPP criticized China for trying to force Chen Shui-bian to accept the "one China" principle by oppressing Taiwanese businessmen based in China.

The pro-independence Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) praised Hsu's political stance and said he set a good example for China- based Taiwanese businesspeople.

Meanwhile, the newspaper's editorial triggered heated discussions on the Web site of China's state-run Xinhua agency.

Online users listed the names of more than 20 Taiwanese singers and entertainers in an Internet chat room, calling for Chinese fans to boycott products and concerts, saying that they were pro-green camp figures.

There is a Chinese saying that goes, "The trees may prefer to stay calm, but the wind won't stop blow-ing." This is the best description of the nation's political situation. Most people hope that the political conflict can be handled by the judiciary, and that society can return to normal as soon as possible. Unfortunately, the pan-blue camp has insisted on not abiding by the principles of democracy and the rule of law by staging more protests. The Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) and the People First Party's (PFP) legislators held a protest at the Legislative Yuan yesterday against an "illegitimate government," yet another example of the pan-blue camp's unclear strategies and wrongheaded tactics.

The pan-blue camp enjoys a slim legislative majority, and it was not surprising that it chose the legislative floor to obstruct the government. However, the performance of the legislative caucuses showed a more disordered logic. Since they agreed to allow Premier Yu Shyi-kun to deliver his administrative report and receive questions, it was strange that they should then threaten to walk out of, or even dismiss, the meeting. In the morning, pan-blue lawmakers yelled "no truth, no president," called the government "illegitimate" and addressed Yu and his Cabinet members as "Mister" or "Miss" -- instead of by their titles -- but then asked them questions in the afternoon. The morning's shenanigans impressed no one.

When the Legislative Yuan's Procedure Committee met a few days ago, a majority of the KMT and PFP legislators agreed to schedule the premier's report for yesterday, along with a question and answer session. Then they turned around and threatened to boycott his report. What does the pan-blue camp really want? Not even they seem to know.

The KMT's high-ranking members are positive about the outcome of the March 20 election recount, ordering each party division to prepare for a possible new election next year. This amounts to disrespect for judicial independence, since the Taiwan High Court has yet to reach a verdict. If the court rules out a new election, the KMT and the PFP will look like fools. Of course, they already made themselves look foolish by first billing a tour by KMT Chairman Lien Chan to rural areas this month as a "campaign for a new election," before switching to calling it "a journey to express gratitude to Lien's supporters."

In choosing either to accept or reject the results of the election that gave the Chen Shui-bian administration a second term, the pan-blues are perfectly within their rights. People outside their camp can have no say in this. But if they have decided to boycott Chen's "illegal government," then they should at least be consistent about it. The two parties should not only try to keep to their jointly-agreed positions, they should also stop changing these positions. Moreover, will scenes of pushing and shoving in the legislature, while gangsters raise a rumpus outside, encourage an increase in votes for the pan-blues or a backlash? The answer should be fairly obvious.

The Democratic Progressive Party is committed to promoting its political achievements in the run-up to the year-end legislative elections, while the pan-blues focus on a superficial boycott in a bid to capture the media spotlight. If they want to take a more constructive approach, they should work toward creating an effective legislative system that can monitor and act as a counterbalance to the executive branch and leave the debate over the election results in the hands of the judicial authorities.