Koo statement on Oct 13, 2004

Koo defends his controversial ads

UNWANTED ADVICE: The senior advisor to the president said he wanted to get the US to drop its `one China' policy, but the ads did not reflect policy at the Presidential Office

By Melody Chen
STAFF REPORTER

It is "extremely difficult" for the US to change its "one China" policy, said Senior Advisor to the President Koo Kwang-ming, who returned on Monday from a trip to Washington to try to persuade US officials to give up the policy.

The 80-year-old Koo met with US State Department officials, including US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who were perplexed or angered by his advertisements in US and Taiwanese newspapers last week that urged Washington to rethink its "one China" policy.

Koo's full-page ads, headlined "US adherence to one China policy only benefits communist dictators: Let Taiwan speak out for a lasting peace," appeared in the New York Times and the Washington Post on Oct. 4 and the Taipei Times on Oct. 5.

At a press conference hosted by the Taiwan North Society yesterday, Koo said he was surprised by the strong reaction to the ads.

Koo was in Washington the day his ads appeared in the two US papers. The White House called the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO) in Washington at 9:30am demanding an explanation.

The State Department made a similar call at 11:30am.

"They asked what my ads meant," Koo said, describing his ads as "a blow to the US government" that "hurt the self-esteem of State Department officials."

Both the White House and the State Department asked if the Presidential Office had authorized the advertisements, which cost Koo US$200,000.

The Presidential Office denied prior knowledge of Koo's plan to place the ads.

"The State Department should ask our government whether it supports my view that the US should not adhere to the `one China' policy anymore. Of course our government wants the US to remove the policy," Koo said.

He said President Chen Shui-bian didn't know about his ad plan. After the ads appeared, Koo called Ma Yung-cheng, a top Presidential Office staff member, three times, wanting to talk to Chen.

"Ma's aide told me he was in a meeting. Ma never replied to my call," Koo said.

Despite the uproar, Koo said he was "very satisfied" with the impact of his ads.

"Actually, almost everyone I met in Washington praised my ads and said they personally agreed with me. However, they added that as staff of the State Department, they could not support my view," Koo said.

Koo said he tried to dissuade US officials from doing what China asked of them in matters related to Taiwan.

China is happy that the strategy of getting Washington to apply pressure on Taiwan works, but "Taiwan suffers and its dislike towards the US is growing," Koo said.

"The US has been urging us to talk to China. However, if the US continues to serve as China's mouthpiece, China will not need to initiate any dialogue with us. It simply has to ask Washington to command Taiwan to do what it wishes," he said.

Koo criticized Chen's Double Ten National Day address, in which he invited China to start talks with Taiwan on the basis reached during a 1992 Hong Kong meeting. Koo said such remarks were inappropriate.

Koo said he has previously advised Chen not to offer any more olive branches to Beijing.

China froze cross-strait talks during Chen's first term but cannot afford to turn its back on Chen for another four years, Koo said, adding that Beijing will have to find a way to talk to Chen sooner or later.

Koo said he told US officials that he wished for three things.

"First, I hope TECRO's name could be changed to the Taiwan Institute in America," he said.

"Second, Washington should stop doing what China asks it to do over Taiwan. Third, I wish to be invited to attend President [George W.] Bush's inauguration ceremony if he is re-elected. I am already 80 and don't have many years left," Koo said.

DPP wants 319 committee gagged

By Jewel Huang
STAFF REPORTER

Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) officials yesterday urged the convener of the March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee Shih Chi-yang to ban committee mem-bers from publicly commenting on the investigation.

The DPP officials said such commentary only exposed the essence of the committee, which was contempt for the law.

In a news conference held after the DPP's weekly Central Standing Committee, the officials showed video footage from two call-in TV shows aired Monday night in which committee member Yeh Yao-peng announced his opinion of the investigation and his suspicion that President Chen Shui-bian faked the shootings.

"Yeh's behavior gave the game away. The investigative committee is simply a means for the pan-blue camp to denigrate the president," DPP Deputy Secretary-General Chung Chia-pin said.

"We strongly suspected that the pan-blue camp wanted to use this committee to overturn the results of the presidential election in case it loses the election lawsuit that will be judged soon," Chung said.

Chung said committee members are supposed to obey a gag order, but Yeh has been talking about his theories on shootings ever since March 20 and has continued to do so despite being chosen as a committee member.

Chung asked Shin to make it clear to the committee members that they cannot comment on the case.

"Otherwise, people will quickly perceive the illegitimacy of this organization," Chung said.

According to Chung, Vice President Annette Lu said during the DPP meeting that the committee should be told that judicial procedures cannot be sacrificed.

In related news, Chung said DPP headquarters would not get involved in the debate over whether the party should expel former Examination Yuan member Tsai Wen-pin, who volunteered to join in the investigation committee. The DPP has asked its members not to support the committee.

Chung said that the party branch in Tainan City will handle the case.

"But it is obvious that Tsai diverges from the party's stance," Chung said.

Earlier in the day, the DPP launched four campaign teams for the December legislative elections.

The teams will be led by DPP Secretary-General Chang Chun-hsiung, Premier Yu Shyi-kun, Kaohsiung Mayor Frank Hsieh and Secretary-General of the Presidential Office Su Tseng-chang to help boost momentum for the campaign.

According to Chang, 108 campaign rallies will be held around the country, starting this Saturday and running through the middle of next month.

Each of the four campaign team leaders is responsible for hosting 27 rallies.

Chung said the DPP is quite optimistic about its election chances, based on its latest poll.

He said the pan-green camp has reached the "magic number" of 110 to 115 probable legislative seats, moving the DPP closer to its goal of dominating the Legislative Yuan.

Japan's UN aspiration worthwhile

By Wen Wei-Ni 

Most people snigger at the idea of Taiwan supporting Japan becoming a permanent member in the UN Security Council.

This gesture of support by Taiwan, whose voice has been muffled by China to the point of near silence, is unfortunately pitifully amusing. After all, President Chen Shui-bian's videoconference with the UN Correspondent's Association had to be relocated at the last minute to outside the UN premises in response to China's protests; membership of the World Health Organization is still out of Taiwan's reach even after the global SARS outbreak; while less than a month ago, Taiwan's bid to join the world body failed for the 12th consecutive year to even make the agenda for the UN's General Assembly.

What practical value does Taiwan's support have in this global organization, from which it is excluded for no reason other than pressure from a single authoritarian nation?

But the bizarreness doesn't stop there.

The permanent members of the council were the victorious nations of World War II. At the time, they represented the peacekeepers of the world. Half a century after formation though, the members of the Security Council have made a mockery of its authority by using its power for their own good: for example, the US' behavior in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq last year, despite the opposition by other UN members, and retaining the exclusive right to possess nuclear arms while formulating the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which forbids the rest of the world from doing so.

The "global watchdog" has only been looking out for its own good, so why do we still grant this relic of World War II a status it doesn't deserve, and why are we eager to play by rules we know to be unfair?

For Japan to become a permanent member of the Security Council, the past 10 years of talks about UN reform need to graduate from the "discussion" level. Changing the composition of the Security Council's permanent members -- for a better representation of today's world powers and fairly reflecting the interests of the developing world -- will require amendment of the UN Charter as well as approval by all five veto-wielding members of the council.

The paradox of this is obvious. Would any of the existing permanent members allow newcomers to dilute their power -- if, indeed, there is truly power attached to such status?

China has already jumped up in opposition to Japan's bid for a permanent membership. Understandably, why would China allow another Asian nation to gain the same status it has and counterbalance its military expansion in the Asia-Pacific region?

Japan has been struggling with the guilt and shame of its crimes in World War II. Its aspiration to become a permanent member of the Security Council stems from the growing awareness of the need for a strong democratic nation to balance the ambitious and expanding authoritarian China in the Asia-Pacific region.

The effort by Japan to move beyond the shadow of World War II is not purely academic. Japan's dispatch of Self Defense Forces to the Indian Ocean and to Iraq following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks were missions that ex-ceeded the limits of UN peacekeeping operations and gave the country confidence.

Just as Japan has realized the necessity of growing out of the boundaries the world has imposed on her, Taiwan, too, is merely trying to make the most of itself.

Taiwan's support for Japan is part of its humble wish that, by balancing the power structure in East Asia, peace can be kept in the region as well as across the Taiwan Strait.

It's time for the UN to stop belittling the nation.

Wen Wei-ni is a freelance writer based in Taipei.

China tells EU it must lift ban on arms sales
AP AND CNA , BEIJING AND TAIPEI

China demanded yesterday that the EU lift a 15-year-old embargo on weapons sales to Beijing, criticizing it as a Cold War relic after the latest French attempt to end the ban failed.

EU foreign ministers meeting Monday said they needed more time to reach consensus on whether to end the ban, imposed after Chinese troops crushed the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protests.

"We believe it's a result of the Cold War. The decision was 15 years ago," said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue at a news briefing.

"It's not in line with the present situation in relations between China and the European Union," Zhang said. "We believe the arms embargo is totally unreasonable. We want it lifted."

The government of French President Jacques Chirac has fought to end the ban. Visiting Beijing last week, Chirac criticized it as outdated and motivated by "hostility toward China."

But Sweden and other EU governments want to maintain the ban, and even tighten it.

The US has pressed the EU to maintain the embargo and has threatened to curtail transfers of some sensitive military technology to European countries if it were dropped.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs urged the international community yesterday to pay more attention to China's ever-growing military strength which the ministry said poses a serious threat to Taiwan Strait and Asia-Pacific security.

The ministry made the appeal amid reports that EU foreign ministers had failed to agree Monday on lifting the bloc's 15-year-old arms embargo against China despite strong French lobbying.

Speaking at a regular ministry news conference, deputy spokeswoman Anna Kao said the proposal to lift the arms sales ban against China was not put on the agenda of the EU foreign ministers meeting in Luxembourg because a majority of member nations oppose lifting the ban.

The EU foreign ministers only held informal discussions during a lunch meeting Monday, Kao said.

Maysing Yang, director of the ministry's Research and Planning Board, said that thanks to prominent media coverage in recent months, the world community has taken greater notice of Taiwan's concern about the proposed lifting of the EU arms embargo against China.

For instance, Yang said, foreign wire services had reported a series of demonstrations staged by local activists outside major EU countries' representative offices in Taipei.

Struggling against Beijing's evil ways

By Paul Lin

China is the world's most populous country. Not only have the information-isolated Chinese become hostages of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), but they have also become tools used to threaten foreign countries. As Beijing often claims that it repre-sents the almost 1.3 billion people, this is clearly a "human-wave" tactic.

Today, the US is cautious with China due to this unbearable tactic. Modern US weapons are famous for precisely striking military targets. But the US will be in a dilemma if China drives innocent civilians to the front lines. That is exactly why China, backed by the US principle of not killing innocent people, fears nothing while constantly threatening the world.

In the face of the massive pressure after the Tiananmen Massacre, former leader Deng Xiaoping said that China's democratization would bring riots, forcing millions of people to flee to Japan, Thailand and other countries.

Just as expected, some Western countries were frightened, and they echoed this tune, as Beijing upheld the slogan: "Stability outweighs everything." But the Chinese people are not stable. As the gap between rich and poor gradually worsens, more and more people are moving to other countries for the sake of their survival, legally and illegally.

China has been tolerant of the wave of illegal emigration. Since it is difficult for Chinese to fully enter mainstream society in other countries and most of their relatives are still in the hands of the party, Beijing is able to indirectly manipulate them.

China's new role as a "world factory" thanks to its relatively cheap labor force has also caused certain international conflicts. Nevertheless, Beijing recently called on its immigrants in Europe to bravely protect themselves and strive for their right to participate in local politics. This statement may cause even more doubts about the huge number of Chinese immigrants worldwide.

There are more examples of this tactic.

When attending the 2004 annual meetings of the boards of governors of the IMF and World Bank group, People's Bank of China Deputy Governor Li Ruogu stunned us by saying that 100 million refugees will swarm into Japan, South Korea or the US if the Chinese yuan floats rashly. Obviously, the "human wave" tactic has also been applied to international finance.

We all know that the US has been unsatisfied with the yuan's peg to the US dollar. Although the yuan is supposedly pegged to the US dollar, China did nothing when the US repeatedly lifted its interest rates recently. This is mainly because an interest-rate hike is disadvantageous to China's state-owned enterprises, which have made up various reasons to obstruct any hike.

Therefore, Beijing's claim that the yuan's peg is necessary for its stability is, in fact, nonsense!

But a financial problem will inevitably occur if the US continues to increase interest rates while China does nothing, and does not adjust its exchange rates. At the very least, a large amount of capital may therefore outflow to profit from the interest-rate gap. Plus, it may encourage people to go to the US to make money. Under such circumstances, is Li's threat involving Japan and South Korea a warning for the US not to raise interest rates any more, so as not to affect the yuan?

I believe that China is using its 1.3 billion people as hostages in order to do evil, to demand the world to obey it and to boost Chinese hegemony through terrorist "human-wave" tactic. The Chinese people and all humans should unite to confront China's political, economic and military threats. Otherwise, this kind of "peaceful rising," as Beijing claims, will bring disaster to both China and the world.

Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.

The EU made the right choice

On Monday, the EU rejected France's demand that the group's 15-year arms embargo on China be lifted, and once again criticized Beijing's human rights record. For the sake of international security, and the protection of human rights, the EU made the right decision.

The EU's arms ban on China was imposed in the wake of the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre. The EU policy was aimed at preventing the Chinese government from using its weapons again in a crackdown on its unarmed citizens and to prevent the union becoming an accomplice in Beijing's abuse of human rights.

Given this background, if one wanted to lift the ban, the very first question that should be asked is: Has China's rights record been improved? The answer is "No." In fact, an EU statement on Monday noted a "positive trend" in some areas, but also warned of continuing worries in regards to freedom of expression, religion, assembly and association.

As the statement note, "There has been no progress in the respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities in particular as regards religious freedoms ... in particular in Tibet and Xinjiang."

The second question that should be asked is whether China lacks arms. China is a major power in the Asia-Pacific, and its defense budget reached US$50 billion this year. With more than 100 strategic missiles, more than 600 long-range ballistic missiles, a navy of more than 2,000 vessels and an airforce with more than 3,000 fighter jets, China's military might shames that of its neighbors. It is more than able to defend itself. Even Japan now treats China as a future military threat. An EU decision to lift its embargo would clearly have a negative effect on security in the Asia-Pacific region, since Beijing would be able to obtain advanced European arms systems.

The third question is, why does China need arms? Contrary to French and German concerns, a clash in the Taiwan Strait will not begin with a Taiwanese attack, but rather it will begin with China, which has over 600 missiles aimed at Taiwan. EU sales of radar, communications and other high-tech equipment to China could cause Beijing to intensify its threat to Taiwan, exacerbating the cross-strait arms race, and threatening security in the Asia-Pacific region.

The fourth question is, what would be the purpose of EU arms sales to China? The weapons trade is a highly profitable one, but unless these weapons are used for self-defense, it is an immoral trade that is paid for in blood. Civilized countries do not seek to earn money that is stained with the blood of millions. The EU's "code of conduct" on arms sales forbids the sale of arms to nations with poor rights records and countries which might use the weapons to oppress their own people. This code of conduct should be made more stringent -- and legally enforceable.

Taiwan is a country that loves peace, and if it were not for the threat posed by China, Taiwan would not be spending lots of money on weaponry. The controversial arms procurement budget now before the legislature is for weapons being purchased as a

response to China's threat.

Taiwan has made numerous gestures to indicate its desire to reduce cross-strait tensions. This year, the government cancelled the live-fire portion of the Hankuang military exercises and next year it will begin withdrawing troops from outlaying islands.

It has also expressed its willingness to use the basis of the 1992 meeting in Hong Kong to seek possible formats for future talks to establish a cross-strait structure for peace and security and establish a committee for cross-strait peace and development.

China should not ignore these gestures. The international community should support the two sides of the Strait in engaging in peaceful negotiations rather than facilitating an arms race by providing arms to Beijing.

Practical solutions the best option

By Chen Mu-min 

Recent controversies over Premier Yu Shyi-kun's use of the phrase "balance of terror" to counter China's military threats and the Hoklo language used by Minister of Foreign Affairs Mark Chen to express his dissatisfaction with Singapore have stirred much criticism and prompted a war of words examining these officials' use of inappropriate language in public. The more rudimentary cause of their emotional reactions, however, is Taiwan's inability to change the status quo under China's long-term suppression.

Strictly speaking, the government has exerted its utmost effort in grappling with foreign relations, and its main purpose is to ensure Taiwan's self-awareness in the hope that China and the international community will eventually recognize Taiwan's existence.

The greatest risk in this strategy is that, given the difficulties in making Taiwan's voice heard in China and the international society, Taiwan itself is held responsible for the consequences of provoking cross-strait tension. Military and diplomatic hardship is inevitable when a small nation like Taiwan faces the reality of international politics.

From a military point of view, cross-strait relations currently are obviously tenser than four years ago when President Chen Shui-bian was first elected as a president. Struggling for survival under the shadow of China is Taiwan's fate. Expanding cross-strait economic relations in recent years has not alleviated cross-strait hostility. On the contrary it has made them worse.

Without basic mutual trust between both sides of the Taiwan Strait, many cross-strait policy makers' predict that a cross-strait war will eventually take place. Along with increased military deployments -- both qualitatively and quantitatively -- and rising Chinese nationalism, a cross-strait war becomes increasingly likely.

Looking from the political side, Taiwan's "populist diplomacy" has become the norm, as a result of China's long-term diplomatic suppression and the progress of Tai-wan's democracy. To prove we are able to combat China's incessant diplomatic impediments, Taiwan's government officials have put all of their hopes in diplomatic trips.

If they make a breakthrough in forming friendships with a country that does not have diplomatic relations with us, this is regarded as a major success. Activities that can help increase Taiwan's exposure in international society, such as the Olympic Games and international beauty contests, also become our diplomatic arenas.

Our efforts have not gained much recognition in the international community. The response to the government's decision to hold a national referendum at the same time as the presidential election this year, and the fact that no country other than our diplomatic allies spoke in favor of Taiwan's participation in the UN during the recent session of the UN General Assembly both seem to indicate that the possibility of changing Taiwan's diplomatic status within a short period of time is minimal.

The collision between Taiwan's insistence on maintaining its self-awareness and the international reality has resulted in the gradual depletion of political and economic resources, which has led to Taiwan mistakenly putting its faith in Chinese President Hu Jintao.

Viewed from Taiwan's perspective, there are three possible directions in which cross-strait relations can develop.

First, Chinese leaders may gradually begin to feel that long-term suppression can't solve cross-strait tension; therefore, more practical strategies, including recognizing Taiwan's political entity, and conditionally facilitating Taiwan's return to international society could be implemented.

In fact, Taiwan has made several attempts to restart cross-strait talks, and research units in China have put forward different options, but "one China" is the key to determining whether the cross-strait issue can be resolved.

Since Taiwan is reluctant to make any concession on the "one China" principle, China can't sense any goodwill from Taiwan. Due to the lack of mutual trust, it seems unrealistic to expect China to make any large-scale adjustments on the Taiwan issue.

Second, the cross-strait enmity is becoming more intense as the arms race escalates. Chinese leaders, under great internal pressure, could decide to use military power to solve the Taiwan issue. If China eventually uses military means to destroy Taiwan, it will need to meticulously evaluate issues, such as international pressure, the risk of US intervention, post-war political and economic impacts, and even how to effectively rule Taiwan.

The third and most likely scenario is that China continues to suppress Taiwan, escalating Tai-wan's internal contradictions; as a result, Taiwan's society will deteriorate into long-term disorder, finally undermining the democratic foundation that maintains Taiwan's stability.

It is a pity that, when considering future cross-strait relations, Taiwan's government officials seem to slip into dichotomized thinking, overemphasizing what is good or bad, rather than coming up with more practical solutions on "China's continuous suppression of Taiwan" and "Taiwan's adverse international situation."

It is not an easy task to maintain an equilibrium between retaining our self-awareness and the confrontation with a powerful nation. But Taiwan is not the only nation to have encountered such hardship.

During the Cold War, Finland, under the diplomatic and military pressure from the Soviet Union, couldn't help but detach itself from NATO. Although Finland was cautious in dealing with diplomatic issues, lest it provoke unnecessary conflicts with the Soviet Union, it still preserved its democratic tradition, and concentrated on economic development. It then became a wealthy country. The Finnish experience has taught us how a small country can peacefully coexist with a more powerful one.

The biggest challenge to the current leaders in Taiwan is how to construct a new strategic plan to peacefully coexist with China without giving up Taiwan's self-awareness.

Since Taiwan does not have enough strength to fight China, stubbornly advocating policies to counterattack China not only fails to win international support, but also runs counter to the mainstream international idea of engaging with China in order to change its regime fundamentally.

Taking care of Taiwan's self awareness while coexisting with China is the only way to resolve Taiwan's diplomatic and military dilemma.

Chen Mu-min is an assistant professor in the Graduate Institute of Political Science at National Changhua University of Education.