20040914

STUCK IN THE MIDDLE: Suspicion and a lack of a political asylum law means that, ironically, Chinese dissidents often get little welcome here

AP , TAIPEI

Taiwan would seem like a terrific place for Chinese dissidents to seek political asylum.

The country has a democratic, ethnic Chinese society. Its leaders are former dissidents who spent years struggling against an authoritarian regime. And the government says it cherishes human rights and wants to see rival China blossom into a democracy. But Chinese dissidents who come to Taiwan usually don't get a warm welcome. They're often treated with deep suspicion and are locked up for weeks, sometimes months, as the government decides whether to ship them back to China or pass them off to another country.

That's what is happening to two Chinese who have become the focus of a new campaign for better treatment of asylum seekers. Both of the men, Yan Peng and Chen Rongli, fled to Taiwan this year on sampan boats, saying they were democracy activists who had spent years in Chinese prisons. Allowing legitimate asylum seekers to stay in Taiwan is difficult for a simple reason: There is no political asylum law.

Such a law is being written, said Jeff Yang, director of legal affairs at the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). The draft might go to the legislature by the end of the year, he said.

Vice President Annette Lu said the government shouldn't pass the law because China's large population of dissidents and asylum seekers could flood into Taiwan and overwhelm it.

The constant sense of danger has warped the Taiwanese view of Chinese and has made them overly cautious about asylum seekers, said Wu'er Kaixi, a Chinese dissident who settled here after marrying a Taiwanese.

"This country for a long time has been threatened by a big, powerful bully neighbor," said Wu'er, a former student leader during the bloody 1989 crackdown on the Tiananmen Square protests in Beijing. "This kind of makes them narrow minded. They can only see their enemies."

Wu'er added that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is also obsessed with domestic politics and cares little about pushing for a freer, more democratic China.

"They don't care about anything outside of this island," said Wu'er, who fled to France after Tiananmen and later lived in the US. "The only thing they know is how to struggle on this island and make their own presence, to fight for survival."

The DPP was once banned when Taiwan was ruled by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Many DPP members -- including President Chen Shui-bian -- were imprisoned, harassed or forced to seek refuge overseas.

Rights activist Chang Fei-lan said that considering the ruling party's dissident past, it should feel a moral obligation to do more for asylum seekers, who are held at detention centers with prostitutes, smugglers and other illegal immigrants from China.

Chang, of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, said that Taiwan can easily manage the flow of asylum seekers by setting strict criteria for those allowed in.

"But I think the government is worried that if the asylum seekers become a big issue, it will further complicate relations with China," she said.

Vatican angry over wave of arrests of Chinese Catholics
THE GUARDIAN , ROME

The Vatican has issued a strong denunciation of religious repression in China because of fears that 23 Roman Catholics -- including eight priests -- have been arrested, and some ordered to undergo enforced re-education.

The pope's spokesman, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, criticized China for arresting the eight priests and two seminary students in Hebei province last month.

"The reasons for such repressive measures have not been made known to the Holy See," he said. "If the received news turns out to be true, we find ourselves once again faced with a grave violation of freedom of religion, which is a fundamental right of man."

Two of the priests were sentenced to "a period of re-education through forced labor," while others, detained in Baoding diocese, had not yet been released, Navarro-Valls said in a statement over the weekend.

"According to the information received here, as of Sept. 6, 2004, the number of clergy members of the Baoding diocese detained or deprived of liberty is 23," including a bishop and his auxiliary who disappeared in 1996 and 1997, he said.

The reported arrests are the latest in a string of detentions of Catholic priests and bishops, some of whom run underground seminaries in unofficial churches and private homes, remaining loyal to the Vatican in a communist state which does not recognize the pope's authority.

The arrests reportedly took place on Aug. 6 at a religious retreat in a village in Hebei Province, where many of China's unofficial Roman Catholics live.

Monsignor Giovanni Gao Kexian, Bishop of Yantai, in Shandong Province, died in prison aged 76, the Vatican said.

The bishop had been arrested in the late 1990s for refusing to adhere to the Communist Party's demand that Catholics worship only in churches approved by a state-controlled church group which does not recognize the Pope's authority.

Since China broke diplomatic ties with the Holy See in 1951, the Vatican has preferred to resolve alleged cases of religious repression through diplomatic channels.

Despite the official ban on independent Catholic worship, the US-based Cardinal Kung Foundation estimates there are 12 million "underground" Catholics, compared with the 4 million who follow the state-authorized church.

Recent developments in China point to increasing crackdowns on Buddhists, Christians and practitioners of Falun Gong.

On Aug. 11, the Chinese authorities reportedly arrested Yu Tianjian, a prominent Chinese Buddhist who also maintains residency in the US.

Falun Gong claims that more than 800 of its members have died in custody since the movement was banned in 1999.

This year, as debate has centered on China's human-rights record as the country prepares to host the 2008 Olympic Games, the Vatican has hardened the tone of its public complaints.

ALLEGATIONS: The KMT says it's not behind the attacks, which the DPP decried for damaging the country internationally

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) yesterday denied it was responsible for an anonymous e-mail to members of the US Congress that likened President Chen Shui-bian to Adolf Hitler for an advertisement in a Congressional newspaper that asked the US not to support "a fraudulent president."

Although the KMT distributed the 20-page Bulletgate pamphlet -- which questions the legitimacy of Chen's re-election -- to every US senator and representative in June, and also used the likening of Chen to Hitler in campaign ads in Chinese-language papers in Taiwan prior to the election, former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi, director of the KMT's International Affairs Department, said yesterday that the e-mail and the ad in Roll Call were spontaneous actions by overseas Chinese.

"I don't think that they were designed by the KMT or People First Party [PFP] members," Su said. "But we know that a lot of zealous overseas Chinese in the US thought the election was problematic. So we are not surprised by [the e-mail and ad] at all."

Su, however, admitted that the KMT sent a second edition of Bulletgate to US government officials this month, which warned Taiwan's freedom of the press was at risk.

"The KMT will not forgo any chances to appeal to the international community," Su said.

The e-mail -- entitled "US Government Backing `Taiwan Hitler' for a War?" -- was sent to members of Congress earlier this month and can be viewed on the Internet (www.2bullets.com/index.htm). Mugshots of Chen and Hitler are on the e-mail, which also says Taiwan will provoke a cross-strait conflict and labels Chen a warmonger who relies on US support. It also asked the US not to side with Chen since "Chen is an illegitimate president who stole a fraudulent election."

The half-page Roll Call ad was sponsored by the "Truth Alliance" and "Chinese-American Alliance for Democracy in Taiwan." Headlined "In Taiwan, Dead People Can Vote!" the ad claims Chen won re-election through trickery.

High-ranking Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) officials yesterday denounced the e-mail and the ad as defamatory and said the party would issue a brochure entitled March for Taiwan's Democracy, which would outline the political circumstances that Taiwan went through before and after the March presidential election.

In a news conference yesterday, DPP Information and Culture Department Director Cheng Wen-tsan said 30,000 copies of the brochure would be published in Mandarin and English. Cheng said the party would also send a letter to Roll Call in order to respond to the claims made in the ad.

Cheng said that the pan-blue camp has trashed Taiwan's reputation internationally by spreading ridiculous allegations.

"People who make untrue accusations ignore the country's interests," he said. "This libel is groundless and has hurt Taiwan's image. The DPP has a responsibility to correct the situation."

Deputy Secretary-General Chung Chia-pin said that the party is willing to provide airfare for members of the groups who sponsored the Roll Call ad to return to Taiwan. Chung said that both groups are obviously out of touch with Taiwanese society.

MOVING MOUNTAINS: The North Korean foreign minister says the mysterious blast was no nuclear explosion, but the detonation of a mountain for a hydroelectric project

A huge cloud that billowed up from North Korea several days ago was part of the planned demolition of a mountain for a hydroelectric project, the BBC quoted the country's foreign minister as saying yesterday.

North Korean Foreign Minister Paek Nam-sun was responding to a request for information about the blast from British Foreign Office Minister Bill Rammell, who is visiting Pyongyang, the BBC quoted Rammell as saying.

South Korean and US officials had already said they did not believe the blast was a nuclear explosion but said its cause was a mystery.

Meanwhile, US presidential hopeful John Kerry slammed President George W. Bush's North Korea policy amid reports of the blast.

The South Korean news agency Yonhap reported that a mammoth explosion in North Korea produced a mushroom cloud more than three kilometers across.

The huge size of the explosion on Thursday, the 56th anniversary of the foundation of North Korea, had raised speculation that it might be a nuclear test. US Secretary of State Colin Powell said there was no indication it was.

In an interview with the BBC, Rammell said Paek told him "that it wasn't an accident, that it wasn't a nuclear explosion, that it was a deliberate detonation of a mountain as part of a hydroelectric project."

Rammell said he welcomed the explanation because North Korea is such a secretive country.

"But I pressed the foreign minister very strongly and said look, you know, if we want to be properly reassured then you should allow international diplomats to actually go to the area and verify the situation on the ground," he said. Paek said he would consider the request, Rammell said.

"If this is genuinely a deliberate detonation as part of a legitimate construction project then the North Koreans have nothing to fear and nothing to hide and should welcome the international community actually verifying the situation for themselves," Rammell said.

Yonhap said the blast was stronger than an April explosion that killed 160 people and injured an estimated 1,300 at a North Korean railway station when a train carrying oil and chemicals apparently hit power lines. North Korea invited international aid workers to visit the site, an unusual move for the reclusive regime.

On Fox News Sunday, Powell expressed skepticism that North Korea would stage a nuclear test explosion.

The North Koreans "know this would not be a sensible step for them to take," he said. "And it is not just the reaction that they might see in the United States; it's their own neighbors."

But another senior US administration official said on condition of anonymity that the US has received indications North Korea might be trying to test a nuclear weapon.

"The mere fact that we are even contemplating a nuclear weapons test by North Korea highlights a massive national security failure by President Bush," Kerry said in a statement on Sunday as administration officials took to the airwaves to deflect concern over the reports.

"During his administration, North Korea has advanced its nuclear program and a potential route to a nuclear 9/11 is clearly visible. North Korea's nuclear program is well ahead of what [former Iraqi president ] Saddam Hussein was even suspected of doing, yet the president took his eye off the ball, wrongly ignoring this growing danger," Kerry said.

"What is unfolding in North Korea is exactly the kind of disaster that it is an American presidents solemn duty to prevent."

The pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong received more than half of the votes in the weekend's legislative council election, but it failed to win a majority. Despite this, voter turnout increased, and all parties advocated the direct election of the Special Administrative Region's (SAR) chief executive, showing that people's desire for democracy cannot be stopped.

Yet democracy cannot happen overnight. People of Hong Kong need to demonstrate more determination in order to challenge Beijing. The election revealed that Hong Kong's people increasingly seek democratic reforms, as seen in the turnout rate, intensified campaigns and the nominees' diverse backgrounds.

Though the pro-democracy opposition only won three more seats than before, this time people like ``Longhair'' Leung Kwok-hung and popular former radio host Albert Cheng were elected. Both were from different circles than previous legislators, who were often lawyers or members of political families. This is encouraging for Hong Kong voters' political involvement. More diverse forces in the legislature can better challenge Beijing's tightening grip.

Whether China's "one country, two systems" policy can succeed in Hong Kong will influence its policy toward Taiwan as well as the power struggle among Beijing's leadership. This increases the international community's interest in the election.

Hong Kong voters expressed their desire for democracy; even the pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong has campaigned for a direct election for the SAR chief executive. Future political reform will focus on this issue and direct elections for the legislative council in 2012.

Chief executive Tung Chee-hwa's lack of popularity has caused a rising flood of protest from Hong Kongers, but Beijing has turned its back on popular opinion, giving Tung its full support. This has only strengthened Hong Kongers' support for democracy. Beijing will soon have to nominate a chief executive who is able to face the legislative council, but one who also appeals to the public.

It is worth noting that Beijing has learned much about elections from Taiwan and is playing a dual strategy.

On one hand, it is offering economic and infrastructure benefits, and is using its medal-winning Olympic athletes as nationalist icons. At the same time it is repressing opposition and using smear campaigns against its opponents. It has paid a price but still won the elections, and this is likely to give Beijing greater confidence in such situations.

The legislative elections were exciting, but as the council is unrelated to the territory's executive power, the result is not particularly relevant to Taiwan. But the DPP, in speaking to the international community, has repeatedly used the regression in Hong Kong's rule of law, democracy, human rights and media freedom as a reason why Taiwan cannot accept China's "one country, two systems" policy.

The nation should clarify its message, on the one hand encouraging Hong Kong's democratic aspirations and providing its residents with the benefit of our experience, while at the same time criticizing Beijing's strategies.

Reformists fought for 50 years against the authoritarian government of the Chinese Nationalist Party to achieve the democracy Taiwan has today. Many members of the international community also provided resources and support.

Hong Kongers face an even more powerful authoritarian government, and their aspiration to create democracy under the "one country, two systems" structure is wishful thinking. What Hong Kongers can achieve is to delay Chinese repression and win a little breathing space.

A report on China's military strength was recently submitted to the legislature by the Ministry of National Defense. As this is a crucial time for cross-strait relations, this report deserves our attention.

Regarding the date of a possible invasion, the report said that prior to 2008, China is likely to use a strategy of military intimidation against Taiwan. After 2008, if there is no upgrading of Taiwan's military strength and a significant imbalance develops, then China is likely to adopt a strategy of de-stroying Taiwan's infrastructure followed by an invasion.

But as far as we can understand, the cause of any conflict in the Taiwan Strait would depend on China's willingness and ability to conduct such a war. As regards its willingness to initiate such a conflict, this is clearly not in accord with China's long-term advantage, nor its goals.

Everyone knows that the goals of China's national development are to maintain a peaceful and stable environment that will allow its economy to continue growing. This is to China's advantage. In this situation, unless Taiwan crosses the "red line," it is highly unlikely that Beijing will initiate a conflict. We have some comments to make regarding the numerous "red lines" that the ministry has adumbrated, which could spark a conflict.

The "red line" encompasses the following conditions: Taiwan declares independence or uses any other method to cut itself off from China; that a foreign power becomes involved; Taiwan rejects negotiations over a long period of time; Taiwan experiences civil unrest; Taiwan develops nuclear weapons capability, makes constitutional amendments pertaining to independence, territorial claims or national status.

A declaration of war is a grave step for a nation and it is unlikely that the Chinese leaders have listed so many specific conditions for going to war, making the world, and even party insiders, wonder why, given these conditions, it has not already gone to war. To do this would simply be to disrupt its own decision-making mechanism.

For example, looking at the condition that a foreign power becomes involved" or that Taiwan rejects negotiations over a long period of time we might well ask what is meant by "involved" and how long is a "long period of time." Involvement of a foreign power was a condition repeatedly emphasized by Deng Xiaoping in the 1980s. At that time, close Sino-US relations caused a cooling in relations between the US and Taiwan, but even though China had little reason for anxiety that the US would become involved in Taiwan it still established this condition as a guarantee.

The current intimacy of the US-Taiwan relationship would quite clearly transgress the 1980s definition of "involvement," so if we regard this as one of China's red lines, then clearly China's leaders have lost the initiative.

As far as ability goes, we believe that China's military would seek to meet three conditions before it initiated a conflict in the Taiwan Strait. First, it would require the ability to swiftly defeat and immobilize Taiwanese forces. Second, it would require a quick victory to prevent complications from changes in domestic and international circumstances and also to control the cost of the conflict. Third, it would require the means to intimidate the US to keep it from becoming involved.

Prior to 2010 it is unlikely that China's military will have the ability to fulfill these conditions, for both Taiwan and the US are not unprepared for this eventuality, and our military strength is constantly improving. If Beijing launched an invasion and failed to achieve its objective, it could expect the following results.

Even the Tiananmen Incident, which was a relatively minor incident in comparison with a military action that would affect the global strategic environment and the security of regional powers, led to economic sanctions. At the moment, China's commercial relations are not totally harmonious, as can be seen from the 31 cases of mediation that have been submit-ted to the WTO in the few years that China has been a member. As China's economy grows and its demand for resources becomes more insistent, it will feel even greater pressure on the commercial front.

Modern wars are expensive to run, quite apart from the military acquisition and mobilization of troops that would be required before the conflict began. During any such conflict, China's economic infrastructure is bound to suffer significant damage, investment would be cut off, and they might even face economic sanctions or even an embargo. This would be a price that China would have to pay regardless of victory or defeat. Hence the saying that the only thing worse than a battle won is a battle lost. If China lost the war, its economy would suffer even more.

Third, a huge reduction in China's national and military strength: Whether it won or lost, national development would go into reverse and China would suffer as a result. The military losses that China would incur in an invasion of Taiwan would leave it unable to stand up to the US and Japan in the Pacific and its dreams to establish itself as a hegemon in Asia will go up in smoke. If it lost the war, it would no longer be in contention for great power status.

Furthermore, if China loses the war, then leaders may have to step down to take responsibility:

China has no leader of similar stature to Mao Zedong or Deng, so responsibility for a military defeat cannot be avoided.

An invasion would undoubtedly break all negotiations across the Strait and "peaceful unification" would no longer be a possibility. If China lost the war, its economy would immediately go into reverse and its military power would be greatly reduced. As the top leadership fights over control of what is left, it is highly likely that given the bad feeling that exists, Taiwan would then immediately declare independence.

Therefore, although China has been building up its military in recent years, the likelihood of war is still relatively low give the political situation in China and various international factors. Of course this requires that the cross-strait relationship continues to develop.

Taiwan's military should strive towards the goal, long promoted by us, of "strengthening the armed forces, spending efficiently and streamlining personnel." Proposals for the purchase of submarines, anti-submarine aircraft and Patriot missile batteries should also be pushed forward to remedy our weakness against a blockade or a missile strike by China. This is the only way to ensure our safety. The purchase of weapons and unity of purpose is the best way of ensuring peace in the long term.

Bill Chang is former deputy director of the Democratic Progressive Party's Chinese Affairs Department. Lee Wen-chung is a DPP legislator.

All together now
TSU Chairman Huang Chu-wen, third right, leads TSU legislators in chanting their aims and objectives for the next legislative session at a gathering to formalize the appointment of new party caucus leaders.
PHOTO: WANG YI-SONG, TAIPEI TIMES