|
|
|
Taiwan
yes on June 19, 2004
Organizers
hope for 2 million at name-change rally CARNIVAL:
The people who brought you last fall's march in support of calling Taiwan
'Taiwan' want to do it all over again, but this time they want it to be bigger
and better Organizers of what has
become an annual demonstration in support of changing the nation's name to
"Taiwan" envision this year's rally as a massive gathering with a
carnival atmosphere that will draw up to 2 million people. Organizers said yesterday that a name-change rally is planned for Nov. 27,
to coincide with the pan-green camp's campaign for the year-end legislative
elections. The Alliance to Campaign for Rectifying the Name of Taiwan is calling the
rally "Lighting up Formosa, Discovering a New Country". Peter Wang, the alliance's executive director, told the Taipei Times
yesterday that the rally will be held at 6pm on Nov. 27 and will feature candles
and flying lanterns in order to emphasize the alliance's campaign to "light
up" Taiwanese consciousness. The alliance last year staged a rally in front of the Presidential Office
to demand the change of the country's name from "the Republic of
China" (ROC) to "Taiwan." The rally drew nearly 150,000 people
and was led by former president Lee Teng-hui , who declared that the ROC doesn't
exist and urged that the country's name be changed to reflect Taiwan's identity
as separate from China. Wang said that the alliance will present its proposals for organizing the
nationwide rally to Lee on Monday. Lee is involved in steering private efforts to promote a Taiwanese national
identity -- including efforts to create a new constitution and to campaign for
changing the nation's name. The event will follow the model of the 228 Hand-in-Hand Rally, which saw 2
million people around the country form a 500km human chain along the west coast.
The rally was intended to protest Chinese ballistic missiles that are aimed at
Taiwan. "The 228 Hand-in-Hand Rally is a wonderful precedent for organizing
political rallies that have a harmonious and carnival-like atmosphere. It also
transcended ethnic boundaries because Mainlanders and Hoklo (commonly known as
Taiwanese) both supported the cause of identifying with Taiwan. Based on this
precedent, we are confident of being able to turn out 2 million people to
support changing the nation's name," Wang said. The name-change campaign has not stopped at the name of the nation: The
alliance, which has promoted changing the names of government agencies,
companies and private institutions domestically and abroad, yesterday lodged a
protest against the Overseas Chinese Affairs Commission's recent decision not to
include "Taiwan" in its proposed new name for its overseas compatriots
service center. The commission proposed changing the name of the Chinese Culture Center of
the Taipei Economic and Culture Office to "TECO Overseas Service
Center." "TECO" refers to the Taipei Economic and Culture Office. The name
is commonly used for the nation's governmental institutions overseas. Taiwan's
de facto embassy in the US is the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative
Office (TECRO). The proposal is under review by the Cabinet. Wang yesterday blasted the proposed new name, saying the acronym "TECO"
fails to indicate that the agency is Taiwanese. The alliance has urged the commission to change the institution's name to
"Taiwanese Economic and Culture Office." "No one trying to find the overseas service center would have any idea
what TECO is. The commissions's primary task is to provide services to overseas
Taiwanese. It doesn't just serve Taipei residents. `TECO' downgrades our
national status," Wang said. In response to the group's objections, commission Chairwoman Chang Fu-mei
said that the overseas compatriot center is a governmental organization and
therefore is legally bound to use the name "TECO." "We decided to drop `Chinese' and replace it with `TECO' because we
don't want people to get confused and think that we are an organization run by
the Beijing government. If `TECO' is not clear enough, we could make
supplementary changes, such as adding `Taiwan' in brackets, or spell out the
full name of `TECO' to give a clearer indication of what the agency
represents," Chang said. Chang said that the commissions's operations abroad are governmental and
that any name change is subject to regulations set up by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the US government. Democrats
dismiss China's HK bluster FIRM
ON PRINCIPLES: The chairman of Hong Kong's Democratic Party is unconcerned about
warnings of havoc, and has instead offered to work with Beijing Hong Kong's biggest
democracy party has dismissed Beijing's warning that it will create havoc for
the city's China-backed government if it wins a majority in September's
legislative election. Democratic Party Chairman Yeung Sum said the party would not compromise on
its principles, but was willing to work with Beijing and its government in the
former British colony. "Our basic principles are not changing. Our stance is not changing.
But we can tone down our language," he said in an interview on Thursday. Beijing is clearly worried that pro-democracy forces could derail important
government legislation if they win nearly all of the 30 seats up for grabs in
the 60-seat legislature, or even use their newfound clout to push for
independence. In recent months, Chinese officials and their supporters have launched
blistering attacks on leading pro-democracy activists, warning voters that they
could paralyze the local government or turn the freewheeling capitalist city
into a welfare state. But in the latest sign that the bitter rivals are trying to bring tensions
off the boil, Yeung assured voters that his party would not make trouble. Yeung, who has been banned from entering China, said the democrats were
willing to work with the Beijing-backed government of the territory, which
reverted to Chinese rule in 1997. "I have never said such words," Yeung said, when asked about
fears that his camp could hold the government to ransom. "If we win about half of the seats, the government will talk with us
to try to get our support. People will also have higher expectations of us, they
won't just ask us to present opposing views ... we'll coordinate with the
government's work," Yeung said. Hong Kong's democracy camp, long a harsh critic of Beijing, made surprise
moves last week to mend fences, a conciliatory strategy which pundits say is
aimed at trying to win more support ahead of the polls. Yeung said his party was now toning down its anti-Beijing rhetoric to ease
political tensions in the city of nearly 7 million people. The democracy bloc's call for a truce has not fallen on deaf ears, although
few analysts believe the conciliatory moves by both sides in recent weeks are
much more than gestures. Beijing has quickly proposed talks and beleaguered Hong Kong Chief
Executive Tung Chee-hwa was expected to meet Yeung's party yesterday, their
first meeting in almost a year. Yeung said the party would continue to fight for full, direct elections for
the city's leader from 2007 and all of its legislature from 2008, even though
Beijing has ruled that out. PRC
`police' arrested after complaints of espionage
Hong Kong police said
yesterday they arrested seven men claiming to be Chinese police officers after
they were found acting "suspiciously" in a rich neighborhood. The arrests were made on Wednesday after police received complaints from a
resident in Mount Davis Road, a quiet neighborhood where many wealthy
businessmen live, about "suspicious" males hanging around the area. Hong Kong police declined to comment further and the men were all later
released on bail. Media reports said local residents noticed two cars full of people which
had been parked outside a building block for several days. They seemed to be
spying on someone, the reports said. A resident finally informed the police and seven men were arrested on the
spot. They told police they were "working" and claimed to be
public-security officers from China, according to the Chinese-language newspaper
Apple Daily. They later showed police their Chinese police credentials and requested to
see senior Hong Kong officers, the newspaper said. Hong Kong security chief Ambrose Lee declined to provide further
information about the case but he stressed the territory does not allow law
enforcement officials from outside Hong Kong to operate on its territory. Politics
and music don't mix By
Jason Lee It seems a shame to many
international observers that singer Chang Hui-mei , also known as A-mei, was
targeted by the Chinese just because she sang the national anthem at President
Chen Shui-bian's inauguration in May 2000 (Editorial, June 15, Page 8). In the
first place, what was wrong with A-mei, a Taiwanese national, singing the
national anthem of her nation? It speaks poorly of the Chinese that they chose to mix politics with the
entertainment industry. Did Chen do the same, by blacklisting some of the
Taiwanese artists who chose to support the pan-blue camp in both the 2000 and
2004 presidential elections? Were these artists or their careers affected in any
way? That itself would sum up the key difference between the political cultures
in communist China and democratic Taiwan. The former tolerates no dissenting
views, and everyone has to abide by the "emperor's wishes." On the
other hand, the latter advocates genuine freedom and choice, even on matters
such as political affiliation. China has to realize that politics has to be kept separate from other
aspects of the people's lives, be it the sports, entertainment or even economic
industries. If one day Arsenal star striker Thierry Henry were to visit Taiwan
and acknow-ledged that he enjoyed his stay in Taipei, would the Chinese
authorities ban him or his Arsenal squad from visiting China? Apparently they would not, given the mass appeal of the English Premiership
champions. Why then the double standard treatment dished out to artists such as
A-mei or even Taiwanese businessmen who are pro-Taiwan? I suspect the protest by
the students last week was crafted by the Chinese authorities. That would be
both silly and naive of the Chinese authorities. As the saying goes,
"forbidden fruit always tastes sweeter." The more China seeks to
"punish" pro-Taiwan artists by banning their access to the Chinese
market, the more likely it will become that its own citizens would seek other
ways of supporting these performers, whether by ordering the singers' CDs online
or by getting information from the Internet. It is simply time for China to realize that in order to improve
cross-strait relations, they have to deal with Chen at the highest level. They
have to stop their silly antics of finding fault with Taiwanese, whether artists
or businesspeople. The ball has been in China's court since May 2000.
Unfortunately, they chose to play the wrong ballgame over the past four years.
Chen has been seeking talks and negotiations with the Chinese authorities since
first becoming president in 2000, but to no avail. In conclusion, I would like to pose a question to pro-China candidates
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan and People First Party
Chairman James Soong : How do they view China's actions with regard to the A-mei
incidents, both in May 2000 and last week's "protests," supposedly by
the students? Jason
Lee Beware
of academics By
Chen Ming-chung Taiwan has some very
peculiar "academics." Sometimes it seems like they can be so
contradictory to common sense as to give both academics and science a bad name.
["Academics speak out against arms purchases," June 15, page 4] When we ordinary people consider something to be "expensive," we
usually mean one of a few things. First, we can't afford it. Second, there are
better products at a cheaper price. Third, we don't really need it. If we apply this common-sense approach to the arms purchase, the answer is
obvious. First, rather than "we can't afford it," we can't really
afford not to have it. If China succeeds in taking over Taiwan, all the foreign
reserves, per capita income, state and personal property would be taken over by
the communists. Can we afford not to make a token investment in arms purchases
now, when otherwise we might lose it all? Second, clearly there is no other
product out there to be bought. Third, the need to acquire these arms, when
faced with increasing threats from China, has been repeatedly expressed by our
elected government, nationalized military, and our best friends, the US. The question of how expensive these arms are appears to be the focus of
much debate. Are we to trust these "academics" or
"legislators" who have no heart for Taiwan's survival, but a very big
heart for China? Chen
Ming-chung
|
|
|
