Chen’s arms-deal on Sep 25, 2004

Chen appeals for arms-deal support

NATIONAL DEFENSE: The president said that the arms budget would not take funds away from social welfare projects, as he decried `defeatists'

By Huang Tai-lin
STAFF REPORTER
 

President Chen Shui-bian yesterday said the government's arms procurement plans would not squeeze the nation's social welfare budget.

"Some people have misled [the public by] saying that the arms purchase would affect the budget for social welfare. I would hereby like to stress to the nation's compatriots that the Ministry of National Defense's budget will not affect the budget for social welfare, and the same goes for the special arms procurement budget, which will not affect social welfare either," Chen said when addressing an audience at the opening ceremony of a national conference on the improvement of welfare services.

Chen's appeal came in the midst of heated debate over the government's planned purchase of an arms package from the US, which includes eight diesel-powered submarines, 12 P-3C maritime patrol aircraft and six PAC-3 Patriot anti-missile batteries.

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration's NT$610.8 billion arms procurement plan is currently pending approval in the Legislature Yuan, where the opposition pan-blue camp holds a majority.

Saying that the multibillion-dollar special arms procurement budget will be spread over a 15-year period, Chen said that the government's annual defense spending will total NT$40 billion, or 2.8 percent of the nation's GDP. This ratio is lower than South Korea's 3 percent, the US' 4 percent, Singapore's 4.3 percent and Israel's 8 percent.

In comparison, the NT$610.8 billion arms procurement budget is lower than the amount spent in the early 1990s, when Taiwan purchased F-16 and Mirage 2000-5 fighter aircraft and Lafayette-class frigates, Chen added.

Saying that it is the government's priority to revive the economy before it deteriorates and becomes a social problem, Chen said that the government would not work to obtain economic achievement at the expense of social welfare.

At an event later in the day, the president again touched upon the arms purchase issue in his speech, expressing regret over remarks made by some of those who opposed the arms purchase and were arguing that it should be scrapped.

"Some people have said that there is no point for the arms procurement purchase, as more weapons won't help us win a war [with China] anyway," Chen said.

"It is sad to see that there are people among us who harbor such a defeatist attitude and want to give up already," Chen said.

"Others have argued that the Americans will help us anyway [in case of war]. But Americans pay taxes, too. Do they own us?" Chen added. "The special arms procurement purchases are needed because Taiwan must help itself."

Premier says it's time to say `China' instead of `PRC'

By Debby Wu
STAFF REPORTER

Premier Yu Shyi-kun said yesterday he will promote Taiwan's sovereignty by demanding the government refer to the People's Republic of China (PRC) in official documents as "China."

Yu made the remarks when questioned by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Shen Fu-hsiung yesterday in the Legislative Yuan.

Shen said to Yu that official government documents never referred to the PRC as the PRC, and asked Yu whether it was negligent for the government not to do so.

Yu responded by saying that he had started to address PRC as China recently.

"At least since President Chen Shui-bian's second term began, I have addressed the country on the other side of the Taiwan Strait as China," Yu said. "I also demand, from now on, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other government agencies address the other side, the PRC, as China. China is the PRC, and not just verbally but in writing too," he said.

"In the Executive Yuan's administrative report to the Legislative Yuan this past June, the first focus was to realize Taiwan's sovereignty. Now we have decided on a directive to address the PRC as China," Yu said.

Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Michael Kau said that addressing the PRC as China was nothing new.

"In the past we have addressed the PRC as the Chinese Communist Party, Beijing, PRC, and China, so calling them China is nothing new," Kau said.

"Although the premier's statement gave us a unified and clear direction for the future, what he said was nothing new, and I hope this won't devolve into some political spat," Kau said.

The Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) voiced support for Yu's statement.

"Before, we used to call China the Chinese Communist Party, but since China is really an independent sovereign country, we should address them as China according to international norms," said TSU caucus whip Huang Chung-yuan.

"So calling the PRC China in official documents is correct," he said.

But the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus still suggested "mainland China" was a more appropriate term.

"The cross-strait relationship is in a quite sensitive position, and the government should act according to the ROC Constitution, KMT caucus whip Tseng Yuan-chuan said. "It is still better to address China as `mainland China.'"

Lee defends arms budget

HEATED DEBATE: The defense minister went on the offensive during a question-and-answer session at the legislature, staking his career on the approval of the deal

By Lin Chieh-yu
STAFF REPORTER , WITH AGENCY
 

Minister of National Defense Lee Jye yesterday vowed to resign if the legislature rejects the government's arms procurement budget this session.

Lee said that winning approval of the NT$610 billion (US$18.2 billion) arms deal with the US may be the most difficult mission in his career, and he stressed that the Ministry of National Defense will continue to communicate with those who oppose the deal.

"The ministry has never experienced such an agony over any arms deal," Lee said in response to a lawmaker's question at the Legislative Yuan.

During a heated question-and- answer session at the legislature yesterday, Lee and Premier Yu Shyi-kun were repeatedly challenged by opposition legislators about arms budget.

More than 100 retired generals have signed a petition opposing the arms package, warning it will heighten cross-strait tensions and force an arms race.

Organizers of an anti-arms purchase rally scheduled for today have accused defense officials of pressuring the retired generals to keep quiet.

Lee denied the charge, saying the ministry only explained its policy to the ex-generals.

"I don't agree with the anti-arms deal protest, and the ministry has assigned senior military officials to explain the government's policy to those retired generals who signed a petition," Lee said.

People First Party (PFP) Legislator Chin Huei-chu, dressed in a US Air Force uniform, asked whether Lee agreed with Yu's criticizing the retired generals for having national identity issues.

"I would rather believe that they all love Taiwan and Premier Yu was expected to say something to encourage the ministry," Lee said.

"I can understand their idea of wanting to avoid a vicious arms race between two sides of the Taiwan Strait, but the basis for their appeal -- that China retract its military invasion threat -- doesn't exist," Lee said.

Lee told the lawmakers that he was opposed to the idea of a referendum on the arms deal.

Chin accused the defense ministry of having an "ostrich mind-set" about the arms deal -- hiding its head in the mud and pretending nothing was wrong -- because it was afraid of communicating with the people.

She urged Lee to assign representatives to debate the arms budget with those opposed to the deal.

"We will do our best to defend the policy but we will not join any public debate," Lee said angrily.

"You call me an ostrich ... actually the entire military should act as an ostrich ... the military has done and talked too much already," he said.

Taiwan Solidarity Union Legislator Liao Ben-yan asked Lee to comment on the generals who signed the petition opposing the arms deal.

Lee said the ministry was confident of persuading the generals to support the government's policy.

"If they remain opposed to the arms procurement budgets or attend the protest, then it must because they have non-military professional concerns," Lee said.

In other developments, the Democratic Advancement Alliance (DAA) and the Anti-Arms Purchasing Alliance -- the organizers of today's protest -- held a press conference yesterday to urge the public to attend the rally.

Anti-Arms Purchasing Alliance convener Chang Ya-chung said the nation's four major religions have promised to send representatives to the protest and rally.

Pastor Chow Lien-hwa, who attended the press conference, said that he hoped Taiwan would not enter an arms race. He said he was willing to pray for the nation during the rally.

Some modest proposals

Recently, I saw several articles published in the editorial section of the Taipei Times regarding how Taiwan is being harassed by China in the international theater.

These harassments consist of everything from the name of Taiwan, China's crackdown on "pro-green" Taiwanese business people and entertainers ("Opening to the Enemy," June 30, page 8) and the repeated campaign against Taiwan's membership in UN ("Long view needed in economic diplomacy," Aug. 28, page 8).

On all of the above issues, may I present my view, to see if the Taiwan government can take quick action in developing a new strategy and implementing it as early as possible for the benefit of the Taiwanese people and their future freedom and happiness.

Perhaps, you might like to forward this letter to President Chen Shui-bian as well as to his Cabinet members for consideration.

Taiwan's name: Recently, we were watching the opening ceremony of the Olympics and saw the Taiwan called "Chinese Taipei." One of the US viewers asked, "Where is the country `Chinese Taipei? Is it in China?'"

From time to time, we also read articles in newspapers and magazines and are very confused about the distinction between the Taiwan-owned China Airlines, China Petroleum, China Steel, China Shipbuilding, and China-owned entities with similar names.

One American even walked into a travel agency asking for a China Airlines flight to Beijing!

Since early years of the Cold War in the 50s and 60s, there have been postal problems between China and Taiwan. Mail gets returned to the sender if he or she uses the name "Republic of China," because such mail is often sent to China instead of Taiwan.

Therefore, we have always used the name "Taiwan" or "Formosa" when the addressee is in Taiwan and tried not to use the word China, to be sure that the mail reaches to the Taiwan addressee.

Chen spoke on behalf of Taiwan's UN bid during his recent interview with members of the UN Correspondents Association.

He said that Taiwan's unfair exclusion from the world body was tantamount to being an "international vagabond" and thus the country was the "victim of political apartheid."

Despite Chen's comments, Taiwan was again rejected this year in its annual bid for UN membership.

The key issue is China's "one China" card. In fact, the "one China" view was inherited from the civil war between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party.

Based on the above facts, Taiwan should not stubbornly try to keep the name "Republic of China" or "ROC" to challenge China for its seat in the UN. Indeed, Taiwan now has not tried to revise the decision of UN, made more than 30 years ago, to have the PRC take Taiwan's seat to represent China.

(The ROC, on behalf of Taiwan, abandoned its UN membership at that time).

As long as Taiwan used the word "China" as part of the country's name, the UN would not and could not accept Taiwan's proposal.

Even so, Chen mentioned the examples of North and South Korea and West and East Germany. But Taiwan and China are not currently on an equal footing in the same way that the Koreas and Germanys are. Therefore, it would be wise for Taiwan to seek a new strategy.

One of the strategies that should be considered and developed is to not bother too much about acquiring UN membership, but instead concentrate the nation's efforts on maintaining a neutral position -- similar to what Switzerland did some years ago.

In doing so, Taiwan should immediately delete the name "ROC" and any other name including the word "China." As Chen said, Taiwan is Taiwan. The name Taiwan or Formosa has been recognized by the international community for centuries.

By settling on the name Taiwan, and working to maintain the country's neutrality, we believe that the UN in time will officially invite Taiwan to join the body as a member, instead of Taiwan lobbying for such membership.

Taiwan's investment in China: In accordance with your editorial entitled "Opening to the enemy" (June 30, page 8), it seems Taiwanese businesspeople should start searching for other locations for their enterprises outside of China.

Why in the world should Taiwan become stuck in China, when China has not appreciated Taiwan's economic contribution in these past years?

In order to relocate Taiwanese enterprises, the government should develop a national strategy, giving financial support to companies searching for good investment destinations in countries who are much friendlier to Taiwan.

Taiwanese businesspeople should also look for places with less political risk in order to receive the government's support.

The government should develop a plan similar to the Japanese government's plan, by supporting enterprises which pursue global markets and competition.

Taiwan, with its well-known high-tech businesses, should find no difficulty achieving world-class status and finding friendlier destinations for investment.

On economic diplomacy: an article published in the Taipei Times on Aug. 28 titled "Long view needed in economic diplomacy" is very perceptive.

The basic mistake made by the government in the past in aid programs to developing countries has been to give gifts instead of loans, like Japan.

The government should change this policy and use the method of the Japanese government on foreign aid programs as soon as possible.

In order to be successful, the government should work closely with Taiwan's private enterprises and use these enterprises as a vehicle to offer financial assistance to needy countries.

By doing so, it would not only enhance Taiwan's international position in making friends both politically and economically, but would also help Taiwan's enterprises enter international competition successfully and protectively.

To achieve the above proposed scenario, the first thing to do is to unite the pan-blue and pan-green camps and work together at this difficult time for the benefit of Taiwan's future prosperity and happiness, and not for personal gain.

After all, Taiwan is Taiwan, as Chen said. Taiwan should form a united front when facing harassment from an outside enemy who aims to harm the country's social welfare, freedom and happiness.

Yoshiko Tio   Houston, Texas

With friends like these ...

The NT$610.8 billion (US$18 billion) arms procurement plan has polarized public opinion to an extent reminiscent of the runup to the presidential election. An alarming development is the anti-procurement protest by more than 150 retired generals. This reveals the extent of the divisions in this country. It also shows that some consider politics more important than national security. If this situation continues, the international community may well question why they should support Taiwan.

Every sovereign nation requires a robust defense system that can deal with any immediate or potential threat from outside. This is true of any country, regardless of the system of government. Even pacifist groups, when faced with a threat from a global or regional power, would not expect their own country to dispense with their military capability and just sit still, waiting for the enemy to do what it will.

These military officials were cultivated by past governments, and they enjoy generous retirement pensions to this day. They should certainly see the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as Taiwan's biggest enemy.

During their tenure under the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) rule, they upheld the government's plan to regain China by force, and implemented a decade-long arms purchase plan of NT$450 billion to strengthen naval and air defense capabilities. In fact, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government's 15-year purchase plan of NT$610.8 billion was organized between 1995 and 1998 by some of these now-retired generals.

After these men retired, some moved to China, while others frequently travel between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Surprisingly, they now speak for their long-time enemy. They say that Taiwan cannot defeat China no matter how many weapons are bought, so it's better for us to save money and try to resolve cross-strait issues through political means. Such statements prove that they not only deceived the people in the past, but are also willing to give up the nation's sovereignty in order to unify with China.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Taiwan's annual military budget of 3 percent of GDP does not have a negative impact on its spending in areas such as education and social welfare. China's military spending has, meanwhile, seen double digit growth for years. President Chen Shui-bian has said that the number of Chinese missiles targeting Taiwan has now increased to 600. The US has predicted that the balance between Taiwan's and China's military power will tilt in Beijing's favor by 2006.

Against this backdrop, 150 generals now not only refuse to sign a petition demanding that China drop its threat to use force against Taiwan, but are also asking Taiwan to put down its defenses. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Many civic groups have come out against the arms purchase, out of concern that the that the huge expense will be a burden to future generations. They have called on the government to provide more guarantees that this allocation of funds will not affect other expenditures. This is the correct way for the people to monitor a government's activities. But the fact that these generals should so neglect the nation's safety is a sign of creeping defeatism and neglect of martial virtues.

If even our generals are now pawns in China's unification game, and if these opposition forces have become defeatists who work against the core interests of their own country, then how can Taiwan effectively seek support from the international community? What duty would the US and Japan have to continue their involvement in Taiwan's defense?

These soldiers have lost their faith, and they stand at the head of a path that leads to treason. They should be forcefully reprimanded by the people.

Hu's rise could be a turning point

By Cao Changching

The recent secretive 4th Plenary Session of 16th Chinese Communist Party Central Committee ended over the weekend.

As the occasion was filled with such cliches as giving justice to people and pledging loyalty to the party, the only newsworthy development was that President Hu Jintao was to replace Jiang Zemin as chairman of the Central Military Commission. So Hu has a new title now.

What made a power-grabber like Jiang agree to resign? Some believe that he was pressured by other party members who cited the example of former leader Deng Xiaoping, who handed over his chairmanship of the military commission two years after his retirement.

Jiang, however, still holds power to a certain degree. It is unlikely that he was forced to resign.

Others think that Jiang agreed to hand over the reins of power because he already made sure that Hu would wholeheartedly follow his route and protect his family's welfare. Yet based on the past two years' political development, Jiang and Hu apparently pursued two different routes. Jiang played the Taiwan card, emphasizing the cross-strait crisis to secure support from the military.

Hu, on the other hand, played the economy and anti-corruption cards, attempting to build up his political assets by winning people over . They obviously represented two distinctive forces.

The most probable explanation for Jiang's retirement is that his heart problem has reached a stage where he can no longer sustain the pressure of his job. Sources said to the Western media that when Hu Yaobang had a heart attack and fainted at a conference in 1989, Jiang, who was sitting next to him, immediately fed him the medicine he took himself. Based on this, Jiang has had heart disease for at least 15 years. Actually he did not look well last month when he attended Deng's 100th birthday. It was generally inferred then that his health condition had already been worrisome.

Sad to say, it usually takes a dictator's ill health for changes to happen in an authoritarian regime. For example, the collapse of the U.S.S.R. resulted from consecutive deaths of the communist party leaders -- from Stalin to Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko. Finally, when power came to Mikhail Gorbachev, he began to think differently. China has only reached the third-generation leader Jiang. Now this generation has finally come to an end.

What will fourth generation leader Hu do? As long as he has not turned his new title into actual power and Jiang is still around, nobody knows for sure if he can think differently. This, however, still represents a potential turning point -- and maybe a hope -- for Chinese politics.

Cao Changching is a writer based in the US.