A stolen-assets tour on Oct 22, 2004

DPP to offer a stolen-assets tour

TRIP THROUGH HISTORY: The party announced plans to publish booklets and maps listing the 12 properties and buildings that the KMT illegally owns in Taipei

By Jewel Huang
STAFF REPORTER
 

Hoping to draw attention to assets stolen by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) during its 50-year rule, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) yesterday launched a tour of locations of disputed properties in Taipei.

Led by DPP Secretary-General Chang Chun-hsiung, the party's Taipei legislative candidates yesterday gathered in front of DPP headquarters, saying their first priority after being elected would be to pass the disposition of assets improperly obtained by political parties bill.

"If the pan-blue camp holds the majority in the legislature once again, the KMT will continue to occupy these illegal properties and companies or sell them," Chang said.

"The reason that the KMT has been able to hold on to these illegal assets so tightly is because the pan-blue camp controls the Legislative Yuan and blocked laws that deal with the issue," Chang said.

"Only by having the pan-green camp win a majority in legislative elections will the country and the property of the people be looked after," he said.

Chang said the DPP would print booklets and maps listing the 12 properties the KMT illegally owns in Taipei City, including the Pa-te Building and the Cheng-chung Bookstore. He also said the DPP would organize tours of the properties.

"The tours will aim to show voters that most of the properties improperly obtained by the KMT are located in Taipei's `golden mile' and cost big money," Chang said.

Meanwhile, Kaohsiung Deputy Mayor Lin Yung-chien and other government officials yesterday morning posted an announcement in front of the KMT-owned Wanshouhsing Cinema in Kao- hsiung, warning prospective buyers of the risk of litigation. Lin said the announcement was framed according to the Disposition of Assets bill.

Lin said that the posting, which has no legal authority, was simply aimed at reminding potential buyers of the possible lawsuits they might have to fight once the draft became law.

Lin Hsiang-nung, the coordinator of the pan-blue camp's election campaign in Kaohsiung, condemned the action as an attempt to "purge the KMT" and said another news conference would be held today to prove the theater had been acquired legally.

DPP lawmakers want KMT assets seized

By Caroline Hong
STAFF REPORTER 

Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators called on the Executive Yuan to move toward provisionally seizing the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) stolen assets yesterday -- and exposed a KMT ploy to launder money.

At a press conference at the Legislative Yuan, DPP legislators Chang Hsueh-shun , Yeh Yi-jin and Lan Mei-chin announced the findings of the DPP caucus' investigation into the KMT party ill-gotten assets.

In 2002, they said, the KMT-owned Central Investment Company received an suspicious loan of NT$1.9 billion from the Fuh Hua Financial Holdings Co. As collateral for the loan, the Central Investment Co used a tract of state-owned land that the KMT was using, which Chang called unbelievable.

"No normal bank would allow an organization to use state-owned land as collateral for a loan. The only reason why it worked is because the companies were owned by the KMT," Chang said.

He noted that the chairman of Kuang Hwa, Liu Tseng-hua, is also a controller at Fuh-hwa, and that its chairman is Chang Chang-pang, a KMT party stalwart.

He accused them of smoothing the way for the loan.

The rights to the same tract of land, Chang said, were recently sold to Kuang Hua for a 50-year period beginning last April.

"Innocent investors who have entrusted their money to Fuh-hwa have a right to know how the KMT is sucking the company dry," Yeh said.

The KMT use of state-owned land as collateral is a perfect example of why the government should take provisional measures against the party or provisionally seize its contested assets, the three legislators said.

No KMT officials were available yesterday to comment about the charges.

Earlier this week Minister of Finance Lin Chuan said the ministry had considered taking provisional action but decided against doing so.

The KMT has said that it would appeal a provisional seizure or any provisional measures.

Yeh and Lan urged the executive to take steps toward provisional measures or a provisional seizure of the KMT's assets to demonstrate to the people the KMT's lack of cooperation in the matter.

One difficulty in taking a pro-active move to seize the assets is that the government would have to put up a huge reclamation bond, pending further legal action.

The DPP legislators proposed that the money for such a bond come from the Executive Yuan's secondary reserve fund.

However, a request for more than NT$50 million from the emergency secondary reserve fund must first be approved by the legislature, according to Article 70 of the Budget Act.

It is unlikely that such a proposal would pass, given the pan-blue majority in the legislature. Nevertheless, the legislators urged the Cabinet to make the request anyway.

"Even if the doesn't get approved, it will show the people once again how shameless the KMT is," Yeh said.

Historic suit filed against lawmakers

PRICELESS REPUTATION: The president wants no cash, only a formal apology from two PFP legislators and a radio talk show host for what he says is libel

By Huang Tai-lin
STAFF REPORTER , WITH AFP 

President Chen Shui-bian yesterday filed a libel suit against a political talk show host and two opposition legislators over their allegations that he had given US$1 million to former Panamanian president Mireya Moscoso as a "settlement fee" for his "improper dealings."

Lawyer Wellington Koo filed the civil suit with the Taipei District Court yesterday on behalf of Chen. Instead of seeking financial compensation, Chen is demanding publication of the court's verdict and a public apology from the three defendants: People First Party (PFP) legislators Liu Wen-hsiung, Tsai Chung-han and UFO Radio chairman Jaw Shaw-kong.

"President Chen regards his reputation as more important than any restitution that could be paid in cash," so he wants the defendants to publish the court verdict and an apology in five local Chinese-languages newspapers: the United Daily News, the China Times, the Liberty Times, the Taiwan Daily and the Apple Daily -- for three consecutive days, said Koo.

Liu and Tsai on Wednesday held a news conference, during which they charged that Chen had presented a check for US$1 million to Moscoso as a birthday gift and as a "settlement fee" for Chen's "improper dealings."

The two legislators said their allegation was based on comments made by Jaw in a recent radio show. Jaw, when pressed by the media on Wednesday for the source of his comments, said he obtained the information from a story posted on the Global Times Web site, a weekly newsletter issued by China's state-run People's Daily.

"The trio severely defamed President Chen's reputation by quoting unfounded information, which they found on a Chinese Web site," said Koo. "They did not make any effort to verify [the information], but indiscriminately spread it."

This is the first time in Taiwan's history that the president has filed a lawsuit against legislators.

Following Koo's trip to the Taipei District Court, Presidential Office Secretary-General Su Tseng-chang held a news conference at the Presidential Office and said that the president filed the suit to not only safeguard his own reputation, but also to protect diplomatic ties between Taiwan and Panama.

Noting Taiwan's difficult diplomatic situations, Su said he felt "chilled to the heart" that there are a few "unworthy politicians" who would side with Beijing, which is known for its animosity toward Taiwan and its incessant efforts to marginalize Taiwan's international space by undermining Taiwan's diplomatic ties with its allies.

"It also makes one feels chilled to the heart that there are political parties, politicians and media outlets so unworthy as to smear not just their own president, but also the head of state of one of our diplomatic allies," Su said, adding that the indecent allegation made by the two PFP legislators on the friendship between Chen and Moscoso is a "great humiliation to women" and that the allegation had also hurt the feelings of the people of both Taiwan and Panama.

Meanwhile, Agence France Presse reported that Moscoso on Wednesday denied that she received US$1 million as a "birthday gift" from Chen.

"I never received a check for any amount as a birthday gift from the president of the Republic of China in Taiwan, as claimed by opposition legislators in that country," Moscoso said in a statement.

"It's a pity that the aid nations like Panama receive from sister countries like the Republic of China in Taiwan, to help us fight poverty, and extreme poverty, could be affected by such baseless claims, which obviously aim to damage the sisterhood that unites our two peoples," she said.

China conducted huge drills in Strait

MILITARY MESSAGE: The PLA sent more than 30 sorties by several groups of fighter and bomber aircraft to the midpoint of the Taiwan Strait last month, US sources say

By Nadia Chao
STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON

According to US sources, the People's Liberation Army (PLA) mobilized 10 groups of various aircraft to make over 30 sorties approaching the center line of the Taiwan Strait late last month. The number of sorties in this period exceeded the record set in 1998 for the number of sorties on a single day. Taiwanese authorities monitored the activity, and the situation was extremely tense at the time.

On Oct. 22, Secretary of State Colin Powell will depart for a tour of Japan, South Korea and China. During his stopover in Beijing, he will speak with Chinese leaders about arms sales to Taiwan and about President Chen Shui-bian's Double Ten national day speech. Last week, in a closed door gathering, Admiral Thomas Fargo, the commander of the US Pacific Command, said that in the short term, there will be no crisis in the Taiwan Strait, but that the US would maintain a high level of vigilance in the region.

Although there is no danger of an imminent crisis in the Strait, those concerned with US-Taiwan relations still believe that in the absence of dialogue and prior to the establishment of structures of mutual trust, there is still a considerable chance of a conflict being sparked accidentally. A number of US academics who have recently visited China have expressed unease over the attitude expressed by China's Minister of Defense Cao Gangchuan and Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxin: that China would have no scruples over going to war on the Taiwan issue.

Sources revealed that on the day in question, Su-27, Su-30, J-8 and J-10 fighters, in addition to various bombers, made over 30 sorties approaching the center line in the Taiwan Strait. This intensity on a single day had not been seen since 1998. Although nothing untoward occurred as a result, both the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government and the Ministry of Defense were deeply concerned by China's provocative behavior.

The following day, Taiwan informed the US, saying that although Taiwan did not wish for conflict, it would not retreat in the face of such provocation and did not flinch from defending itself.

As ChinesePresident Hu Jintao had only recently taken over the position of chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC) at the Fourth Plenum of the 16th CCP Central Committee, the US and Taiwan agreed that this show of force by the PLA was probably intended to show that it had no intention of softening its stance on Taiwan.

Larry Wortzel, deputy director of the Heritage Foundation, stated that when China obtains advanced aircraft, its tactics and training will also change. In recent exercises with the Indian military, India's Su-27s and Su-30s outperformed the US F-15s. For this reason, Taiwan cannot afford to disregard China's air power.

According to Mei Fu-hsing, director of the Taiwan Strait Security Research and Analysis Center, the number of planes deployed on China's coast is actually quite small, as its policy is to limit frontline deployment and keep its main force stationed in the rear to respond as needed. He said that the planes may simply have approached the center line during training as they "turned around" to return to their bases further inland.

This move effectively served to give Taiwan a fright, but this kind of training maneuver might actually become part of the PLA's tactics in future. Based on Taiwan's military intelligence figures, Chinese fighters made 464 sorties along the center line of the Taiwan Strait in 1998. The frequency of such sorties jumped to 1,226 in 1999 and since then has remained in the range between 1,220 and 1,380 every year since.

Exam answers expected next week

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER 

The Examination Yuan will decide next Thursday whether or not to remove the test of the nation's history and geography from January's entry-level national civil service examinations.

The newly-appointed head of the examination committee, Lin Yu-ti, pledged to handle the matter in accordance with the law, skillfully avoiding a possible confrontation with his colleagues opposed to his idea of scraping the test altogether.

Examination Yuan President Yao Chia-wen told a press conference after the weekly closed-door Examination Yuan meeting yesterday that "He [Lin] promised to obey regulations regarding national examinations and resolutions reached by the Examination Yuan meeting."

Lin was at the press conference, but looked at the floor and didn't say anything.

Lin caused a stir on Monday when he said that he would only allow questions about Taiwan's history and geography to appear in next year's national history and geography exams.

At present, only 5 percent of the questions in those tests in the entry-level exams for civil servants are about Taiwan.

The Ministry of Examination has proposed two plans to the Examination Yuan. One is to abolish the history and geography test in the entry-level exam altogether. The other is to change the name of the test from "national history and geography" to "history and geography" and increase the percentage of questions that deal with Taiwan, as opposed to China.

Arguing that Lin was ignoring the interests of the examinees and trying to influence the exams with his own political ideology, Examination Yuan member Hung Te-hsuan threatened at yesterday's meeting to file a motion to have Lin removed from his post.

Hung also berated Yao for his handling of the matter after Yao reportedly criticized Hung's political ideology following his threat to unseat Lin.

Hung said that decided against filing the motion because of the pledge Lin made.

"It's the beginning of a benign interaction," he said. "I'd like to write it off as a misunderstanding since he has promised to handle the matter in a legal manner."

After the press conference, Lin told reporters that he would let the basic-level civil servant recruitment examination committee decide whether the history and geography of the Republic of China should cover just Taiwan or both Taiwan and China.

"I personally think that 100 percent of the questions on `national history and geography' should be about Taiwan's history and geography," he said.

"It's common sense that national history and geography is about the nation's history and geography. And since I have pledged to handle the matter in accordance with the related laws and regulations, I welcome anyone to report me to the authorities if I fail to do so," he said.

The need for trust and better communication

By NatBellocchi 

The Double Ten National Day speech by President Chen Shui-bian lifted some of the tension that still exists in the US-Taiwan relationship, but events connected with the recent full-page advertisement by Koo Kwang-ming in two leading American newspapers, and a symposium on Taiwan's Constitution and US-Taiwan relations, show that some bilateral tension and mistrust remains -- based more on evasion of reality than any misunderstanding. It is not good at a time when the US must work closer than ever with Taiwan through understanding and dialogue.

This is a time when China is strengthening its power and Taiwan is strengthening its identity, raising difficult and dangerous issues for the US to manage.

Koo's Oct. 4 statement, which called on the US to drop its "one China" policy, appeared in the Washington Post and the New York Times. Rumors quickly spread in Washington that China would protest, and that US President George W. Bush had been told the statement was inspired by Chen. A complaint from Beijing materialized, but the rumor about Chen seems a bit far-fetched.

For one thing, it is not so unusual in democracies such as Taiwan and the US for an individual to buy space in a newspaper to further his views. Koo had done this previously, on his own, without receiving such attention.

A few days after this, the symposium took place in one of the Senate's office buildings. China complained again. The Senate would doubtless not take kindly to any demand by the executive branch that its facilities be declared off-limits, and so that too was a non-starter for China.

There were three panels in the symposium, and though there were some fundamentalist senior members of the Democratic Progressive Party on them, each panel also had American participants who encouraged a realistic approach and prudence in the pursuit of Taiwan's objectives. Over the following two days, there was also a "World Taiwanese Congress" attended by various Taiwanese association leaders from Japan, Europe and various cities in the US. They were not connected with the symposium, but their political views mirrored those of present-day Taiwan.

I was disappointed not by the views I heard, but by the absence of China and Taiwan experts or government representatives. It almost seemed that -- rightly or wrongly -- attendance would make the government or China unhappy, or worse, that they didn't think it useful.

This may be stretching it a little, but in my view an opportunity was wasted.

First, they would have heard a range of views of what has become mainstream thinking in Taiwan -- from supporting the "status quo" out of fear of war to backing outright independence. Ignoring this or expressing one's displeasure by putting one's head in the sand is not going to help manage this increasingly complex relationship.

Second, their presence could have strengthened understanding of the importance in US eyes of Taiwanese prudence in managing the cross-strait relationship.

There is much to ponder in the broader tripartite relationship. One immediate task will be to determine what can or should be done once elections are completed and policy review begins. The US will need policies that take into account the mainstream opinion while maintaining good relations with China.

If one looks at what lies ahead for Taiwan -- a new constitution, a referendum and perhaps dialogue with China -- the US may find it necessary to become quite intrusive in Taiwan's domestic affairs. That's dicey in any event, and in any country. Foreign intrusion in domestic matters is never welcome.

The US will have to work with that reality. The core need is close, effective and broader communication with one another. In Taiwan, there are frequent symposiums that invite American and other scholars to take part. The US does this as well, but when it comes to Taiwan, it seldom if ever includes people who do not agree with US policy. This is unfortunate, as understanding is the base for better communication between governments.

One possibility in pursuing better government communication is for the US to establish a cross-strait task force made up of deputy assistant secretaries -- or people of equivalent rank -- from the State Department, the Defense Department, the National Security Council and perhaps others. This group would be tasked with producing a regular report to the president. The report could be drawn from a regular quarterly meeting of the group and their Taiwanese counterparts, and would include recommendations on any matter that should be addressed.

The Taiwanese side would be expected to start a similar process to ensure the president is well informed. There is a need for presidential aides on both sides to be kept well informed about this relationship.

Unfortunately, raising the frequency and level of communication tends to be seen in Taipei first and foremost in terms of high-profile visits or publicly announced bilateral meetings which strain the US' relationship with China. The biggest obstacle to more regular, higher-level liaisons between the US and Taiwan in national security matters, of course, is objections from China. Yet there have been similar, if less structured, liaisons in the past that were manageable. It does require trust, however, and broadening the number of people involved in this liaison strengthens government support on both sides.

There are doubtless many other possibilities for enhancing communication. The US has endorsed Chen's Oct. 10 speech, and one hopes that it could eventually result in a dialogue between Taiwan and China. Even so, it is unlikely to remove the US' need for a continuing and perhaps even closer relationship with Taiwan.

Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special advisor to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed are his own.

A rattled PFP gets down and dirty

People First Party (PFP) lawmakers leveled some disgraceful accusations on Wednesday: they alleged, without providing evidence, that not only had President Chen Shui-bian written a US$1 million check to former Panamanian president Mireya Moscoso as a birthday gift, but that the money was also compensation for his sexually harassing her. The incident highlights the increasing desperation of PFP lawmakers as they come to terms with the very real threat of electoral rejection in December. It also underlines the faux professionalism of media commentators and politicians who wage unsubstantiated, personal attacks on their enemies.

Just when voters thought that the nation's legislators had hit rock bottom with their distasteful campaign shtick, the PFP has managed to do one better. But should anyone be surprised, given that the PFP has been rapidly moving to the very extreme of the political spectrum? They had, after all, incited their supporters and a number of gangsters to launch attacks on the Presidential Office and a Kaohsiung court after the presidential election, dashing any pretence of moderation on their part.

These last four years, PFP legislators have been able to bask in the glow of PFP Chairman James Soong to get elected. But now, with Soong blamed by pan-blue voters for the inability of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the PFP to merge, and the most popular pan-blue politician -- Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou -- reluctant to stump for them, they have realized that the time has finally come for them to act on their own initiative. What better way to hold on to the hearts of fundamentalist pan-blue supporters than to vilify Chen? Taking this step means of course that they no longer covet the support of moderate voters, which in turn demonstrates the degree of their desperation.

The accusations, it turns out, came from a radio program hosted by former New Party stalwart and media mogul Jaw Shaw-kong. When asked where he found his information, Jaw said a staff member on his show had discovered a story in a newspaper based in China after using a keyword search on Google.

What does it say about the credibility of Jaw that he would lend weight to media reports from China, where journalism largely serves as a mouthpiece for the government and where Chen is labeled a traitor for advocating Taiwanese independence? If Jaw's idea of fact-checking is searching Google, then nothing complimentary can be said about him or his organization.

Why did they not check with those who, according to the story, had personally witnessed Moscoso show off the alleged check? Why did they not attempt to locate the check itself? Bent on exposing their own Watergate, these "journalists" don't seem to know or care that investigative journalism is a hard slog -- as Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein discovered investigating a head of state and his aides.

On Wednesday, Presidential Office Secretary-General Su Tseng-chang said legal action would be taken against those who made the accusations. This is an option that should never be exercised vindictively, but in this instance, it is perfectly warranted. Otherwise, unless Jaw and the PFP retract their accusations and apologize, the dignity of the office of the president and that of Taiwan's allies will have been trashed.

Hu's Tibet policy will be felt here

By Fang Tien-sze 

A four-man delegation from the Tibetan government-in-exile visited China last month -- the third time since September 2002 that a special envoy of the Dalai Lama has met with the Beijing authorities. It is also the first meeting between the authorities in Beijing and the government-in-exile since the fourth plenum of the 16th Chinese Communist Party Central Committee, when President Hu Jintao took over all control of the Central Military Commission.

Did Hu show greater flexibility and goodwill on the Tibet issue? As this reflects Hu's attitude toward Taiwan to some extent, we should give the question some consideration.

The Chinese government broke off official talks with the Tibetan government-in-exile in 1993, citing as its reason the Dalai Lama's refusal to give up his demand for independence for Tibet.

China's policy has been to treat the Tibetan question as a "Dalai Lama question," believing that the Tibetan independence movement will die a natural death when the Dalai Lama dies, since there is no other leader of comparable stature.

In June 1998, when former president Jiang Zemin met with then US president Bill Clinton, he added a new condition for the resumption of talks, demanding that Tibet accept the principle that Taiwan was an inalienable part of China in an attempt to sow discord between the Taiwanese government and the Tibetan government-in-exile.

In the face of intense pressure from China, the Dalai Lama appealed to the international community to take notice of the damage China is inflicting on Tibet's unique cultural, religious and environmental heritage, and managed to win foreign sympathy. The Dalai Lama also publicly stated that he was willing to relinquish demands for independence in exchange for "real" autonomy.

China realized that it had lost the advantage in the international propaganda battle and in 1992 the State Council released a series of white papers on Tibet, dealing with human rights, ecology, culture, economic development and other issues.

The number and frequency of these white papers is an indication of the importance the Chinese government places on Tibet.

But Beijing remained adamant in its refusal to resume negotiations with the Dalai Lama. It was not until September 2002, after the flight of the 17th Gyalwa Karmapa to India and as a result of intense pressure from the US that China agreed to receive a special envoy from the Dalai Lama. Even then, Beijing refused to admit that this was an equal official communication with the government-in-exile and referred to the Dalai Lama's representative as being on a "personal mission" and being nothing more than "an overseas Tibetan with close ties to the Dalai Lama."

China has shown greater confidence in dealing with Tibet in recent years, and its attitude has consequently hardened. For example, Tibet was the first area in which China experimented with its "one country, two systems" policy. In 1951, representatives of China and Tibet signed a 17-point agreement in which Beijing promised in writing that it would not alter Tibet's political system and would not force Tibet to undertake a "revolution."

But after gradually tightening its hold on Tibet, China broke its promise and the Dalai Lama was forced to break with Beijing and flee to India. On May 23 last year, the State Council released a white paper on autonomy in the Tibetan ethnic region which explicitly rejects the Dalai Lama's demand for a "high level of autonomy" under a "one country, two systems" structure. Its reason was that Tibet differed from Hong Kong and Macao in not having been a colony of the Western powers and therefore did not face the problem of regaining lost sovereignty.

If this logic is upheld, then China has no business asking Taiwan to accept "one country, two systems." It is obvious that Beijing is simply unwilling to compromise with the Dalai Lama.

The Tibetan government-in-exile has high hopes of what might be achieved under Hu's leadership.

One reason is that Hu served as party secretary in Tibet from 1988 to 1992 and is regarded as one of the few top Chinese leaders with an understanding of the actual situation in Tibet.

Although Hu was responsible for the savage suppression of demonstrations in Tibet and also instituted martial law there, many people believe that he was merely following orders from the central government.

Many analysts believe the special envoy's mission was to negotiate for the return of the Dalai Lama and his government to Tibet. In an interview in this month while visiting Mexico, the Dalai Lama said that both sides are currently working to establish mutual trust and have not yet engaged in detailed discussions on specific issues. Clearly no substantial breakthrough has yet been achieved in the negotiations.

Nevertheless, many people believe that Hu's accession to power will make it much easier to resolve the Tibet problem. Democracy activist Wang Dan has stated that he believes the problem will definitely be resolved during Hu's term.

Now Hu is gradually consolidating his power and he will eventually be able to put forward his own ideas on the Tibet issue.

But opinion in Taiwan is still divided as to what kind of policy the new leadership is likely to adopt in relation to Taiwan. How Hu deals with the Tibet question may provide some hint of what Taiwan policy he will eventually adopt.

Fang Tien-sze is an assistant research fellow at the Cross-Strait Interflow Prospect Foundation.