20041103

UNREST: Beijing is playing damage control as ethnic tensions in central China left seven dead, while thousands of protesting farmers clashed with police
AFP , ZHENGZHOU AND BEIJING

Deadly ethnic clashes between Hui Muslims and Han Chinese in central China were met yesterday with a military blockade and a news blackout as officials attempted to curb the unrest and cover it up.

Despite the heavy presence of paramilitary police in Zhongmou, the rural county in Henan Province where a sudden outburst of violence killed at least seven, possibly many more, local residents remained uneasy.

"We don't dare go out in the fields to work," said a peasant woman in Nanren village, which is predominantly Muslim and has been a flashpoint in the riots that began last Thursday and were only brought under control on Sunday.

Farmers from Nanren clashed with their neighbors in Nanwei, which is Chinese, after tempers flared over a traffic dispute. As well as the dead, 42 were injured, state-run Xinhua news agency said.

Locals disputed the official toll, saying as many as 20 had lost their lives as ethnic animosities flared across this county of rice fields fed by the water of the Yellow River.

Eighteen people were arrested, according to Xinhua, which carried a brief report only on its English-language service, which targets a mainly foreign readership.

None of the Chinese media mentioned the unrest and reports of the incident were blacked out when broadcast by the BBC and CNN television networks.

"All the 18 detained are Han Chinese," a teacher at a Nanren elementary school told reporters. "They were held because they killed a Hui child who was on his way to school."

On Tuesday, Nanren resembled a ghost town, as police officers and communist party leaders patrolled the streets to prevent new disturbances, locals said.

There were unconfirmed reports Muslims from other parts of China had tried to get to Nanren to join the fight.

Some of them attempted to travel to Henan by train, but were prevented by police from getting off, while others arrived in buses and managed to break through the cordons, according to locals.

Foreign journalists trying to enter Nanren Monday were either turned back or detained.

Most residents in Zhengzhou, the Henan provincial capital less than 40km east of Zhongmou, appeared to have heard only vague rumors about the riots, and many were shocked as the vehemence of the clashes.

China's Huis are descendants of Arab and Persian traders. Over the centuries they have mixed so thoroughly with the Han Chinese that they are indistinguishable from each other but for religion, customs and dress codes.

In related developments, officials have vowed to "severely punish" organizers of a mass protest in southwest China amid a simmering conflict over farmland requisition for a hydroelectric project, residents said yesterday.

Around 100,000 people are to be relocated to make way for the Pubugou dam in Sichuan Province's Hanyuan County, and many are unhappy at the compensation payments offered.

Tempers boiled over on Thursday and Friday last week when villagers said at least one person was killed and scores were injured as tens of thousands of people clashed with armed police.

Some protesters were savagely beaten by police in the melee, villagers said.

"They were beating people. Some people were crying, some were on their knees begging for mercy," a resident surnamed Peng from Jinyan village told reporters.

The accusations were denied by an official, surnamed Liu, at the local migration bureau. Liu also denied that anyone died in the clash.

"They said that they will arrest those who led the protests, those who are responsible," said a farmer from Dashu village who identified herself only as Wang.

Another resident surnamed Dong from the same village said officials had made a television appeal to urge people to turn themselves in.

Local officials, led by Sichuan Provincial Party Committee Vice Secretary Li Chongxi, met with villagers Monday to listen to their requests, Sichuan newspaper Ya'an Daily said.

Li was quoted as saying that the Pubugou hydroelectric project -- temporarily suspended due to the protests -- must go ahead and people who incited the protests must be punished to ensure social stability.

But residents remained defiant and said unless they receive more reasonable compensation, they will take to the streets again.

They said officials had visited several villages to admonish and calm down residents but have not yet offered new conditions for compensation payments.

"The riot has died down, but this is only temporary. We have to go out there again because the compensation is just too low. How can we make a living like this?" Peng said.

Villagers said they had been offered between 180 and 320 yuan (US$21 and US$38) per mu (0.0667 hectares) of land which they say is not enough to make up for the annual income of 7,000 yuan from each mu they make from growing wheat, turnip and beans.

"Premier Wen Jiabao pledges on television everyday that farmers' land should be protected, but we peasants could hardly carry on making a living," said Dong.

The lands of some 100,000 farmers in 40 townships spread throughout three counties are expected to submerged by the dam project. Up to one million farmers, many unhappy about their future prospects, are expected to be relocated to make way for the Yangtze's Three Gorges Dam, when the world's biggest hydroelectric project is fully completed by 2009.

More than 20 worker activists at a Chinese factory run by a Hong Kong-based company have been detained by police after a seven-week strike involving nearly 7,000 people, a rights group said yesterday.

The activists were rounded up over the past two weeks at the former Tianwang Textile Factory in Xianyang city, Shaanxi Province.

Around 10 of them were detained prior to Oct. 20, and the rest were seized by police over the past few days, China Labor Bulletin (CLB) said.

The Hong Kong-based rights group said the Xianyang Public Security Bureau has also issued a "wanted notice" for three other workers from the same factory, ordering them to report to police immediately. The factory and police refused to comment yesterday.

According to CLB, the duration of the strike is unprecedented in China since the country began its two decade old economic reform program. The workers, most of them women, began their action on Sept. 14.

They were protesting attempts by new majority shareholder China Resources (Holdings) Co Ltd, listed in Hong Kong, New York and London, to force them to sign what they considered new unfair labor contracts, CLB said.

The company has reportedly made some concessions, although the dispute is yet to be resolved.

According to the CLB, China Resources is refusing to give the workers compensation they are entitled to under government regulations for a change of status from state-owned enterprise workers to employees of a private company.

It said the police crackdown was likely prompted partly by the local authorities determination to prevent the workers from going ahead with a plan to elect a factory-level trade union.

"Government newspapers have been calling for several months now for foreign enterprises in China ... to respect the workers' legal right to establish trade union branches, and now the Xianyang authorities have detained more than 20 workers for trying to do precisely this," said CLB director Han Dongfang.

Hundreds of thousands of workers have been laid off with meager compensation in recent years as thousands of China's state-owned factories are transferred to private ownership.

Their anger has occasionally erupted into violent confrontations with former employers and authorities.

There is no doubt that Taiwan is a sovereign state, but it has yet to become a normal one. If it is to do so, there are three prerequisites. First, abandon the name "The Republic of China" (ROC) in favor of "Taiwan." Second, establish a Taiwanese constitution. Third, become an official member state of the UN.

As soon as Taiwan succeeds in becoming a normal state, we will no longer have to panic whenever a politician makes noises regarding the issue of sovereignty. A case in point is US Secretary of State Colin Powell's comments during an Oct. 25 press conference in Beijing. It should be understood that these words were spoken with the political interests of a politician facing an election.

Taiwan is Taiwan, and China is China. They are different countries, and Taiwan is not a part of China. There has not been a single day in the 55 years since the establishment of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949 that China has had effective control of Taiwan.

Taiwan can be considered a nation in today's world -- it fulfills all requirements for nationhood according to international law. Taiwan has a population of 23 million people and has sovereignty over, and effective control of, the defined territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. These areas are controlled by a government which has the right to form policies and the ability to conduct diplomatic, economic and other types of exchanges with other countries throughout the world.

`Taiwan can be considered a nation in today's world -- it fulfills all requirements for nationhood according to international law.'

From the perspective of international law, Taiwan ceased to be a part of China in 1895. Over the years Taiwan has evolved into a country in its own right. During the course of this development there have been a number of important milestones.

Between 1895 and 1945, Taiwan was a Japanese colony. Afterwards, it became an occu-pied territory under the control of the Allied forces until 1952. Japan gave up claims to Taiwan and Penghu as part of the Treaty of San Francisco in 1951, and since this time, Taiwan's status in the eyes of international law has remained undefined. This issue was left unaddressed in the UN Resolution 2758 in 1971. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) controlled Taiwan illegally under martial law from 1949 to 1987.

The final stage is encapsulated in the period between 1988 to now, during which localization, democracy and the people's ability to decide their own fate have taken root in Taiwan. From its former undefined status in international law, Taiwan has evolved into a sovereign state independent of the PRC. This is the result of its democratization; the development of a Taiwan out of the ROC and the unique political, economic, social and cultural systems which have given it autonomy.

However you look at it, Taiwan is an independent, sovereign state. If it wishes to remain as such, it must have the courage to work toward becoming a normal nation. In this way, the so-called "one China" policy will become a more realistic "one China and one Taiwan" policy, which will herald a new era where the people of Taiwan and China can both live in peace and prosperity.

Chen Lung-chu is chairman of the Taiwan New Century Foundation.

"Taiwan has plenty of rumors, but no evidence" is the impression of many people at present. Ever since the nation's first transfer of power took place in 2000 many people and institutions -- from party leaders and legislators to the media and academics -- have repeatedly abused their freedom of speech. Irresponsible attacks have been made in words and in writing, without any evidence to back up the accusations. As a result, the honesty, credibility and morality of Taiwan's politicians have been repeatedly questioned, while the dignity of our judicial system has also been knocked to the ground.

After the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lost the 2000 election, former New Party legislator Hsieh

Chi-ta accused then first lady Tseng Wen-hui of attempting to flee to New York with US$85 million in cash. That accusation opened a Pandora's Box of mudslinging, with daily refinements in the art of defamation.

More recent examples include: Independent Legislator Sisy Chen claiming that a nurse at the Chi Mei Medical Center told her that the shooting of President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu had been faked, and that the CIA had satellite photos of the making of the president's spurious wound. Former KMT spokesman Justin Chou accused the president of ordering the military to make artificial rain to hamper large-scale demonstrations by the blue camp that followed the election. A fellow of the Academia Sinica came up with a theory that supposedly proved that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) cheated during the election. Another fellow published a book arguing that the assassination attempt had been staged.

But it is not always the president who is the target of such nonsense. For example, independent Legislator Su Ying-kuei accused the president of ordering two members of the Council of Grand Justices to "persuade" him in regard to the March 19 Truth Committee -- though Su has not named names. People First Party (PFP) caucus whip Liu Wen-hsiung and PFP Legislator Tsai Chung-han accused Chen Shui-bian of sexually harassing former Panamanian president Mireya Moscoso and then paying US$1 million to settle the matter. Democracy Advancement Alliance convener Hsieh Ta-ning claims the Ministry of Defense paid off legislators to support the NT$610.8 billion arms budget, but the alliance has refused to identify its eyewitness prior to examination by the courts.

One thing that all these accusations have in common is that no evidence has been produced to substantiate any of the claims. Some of the people involved have already changed their stories in the face of media questions. But even when the accusers are shown to have been confused about their information, they have stoutly refused to admit to any error or to apologize to their victims.

Such accusations should not be made without a thorough investigation beforehand. It is hard to believe that politicians and academics have so little regard for the public that they expect to be able to bamboozle them for political rewards. The history of Taiwan's elections shows that voters see perfectly clearly, and that politicians and political parties that cannot be trusted will eventually be rejected by the people.

It is time to hold people accountable for what they say. When irresponsible claims are made, reporters and voters alike should be quick to demand accountability. People and institutions should not be able to hide their lies behind the protection afforded by the right of free speech. If such accountability is not forthcoming, the people should use their votes to throw out these irresponsible politicians and the candidates supported by grandstanding academics who appear to have lost any sense of moral compass.

Your editorial on Monday stated that it is a tough question whether to back US President George W. Bush or Senator John Kerry in the US election.

If the US election were about Taiwan, that might be the case. It is not, however. Neither is it merely about the US. It concerns the entire world. Whatever our local interests, we in Taiwan cannot overlook that fact.

Since Bush dubiously came to power, the world has undoubtedly become a more dangerous place. There are many more people worldwide who resent and hate the US than there were in 2000. Alliances, formal and informal, that have maintained the peace for 50 years are weaker than before due to Bush's unilateralism.

The Bush administration failed to prevent the aerial attacks on US soil its own intelligence services had warned of. It squandered the goodwill of the entire world in the wake of Sept. 11 (Remember Le Monde's headline "We are all Americans today"?) It started a largely justified war in Afghanistan but failed to find Osama bin Laden or crush al-Qaeda.

In the wake of Sept. 11, Bush actively sought a war in Iraq, seeking to oust president Saddam Hussein on spurious grounds of links with terrorism and claims of non-existent weapons of mass destruction. The fact that Saddam was a secular dictator with little more in common with bin Laden than the fact they are both Arabs didn't seem to concern him.

The idea that Saddam was developing nuclear weapons was tenuous from the start, though no doubt he would have loved it if he could get hold of them. The notion that he had or was developing chemical and biological weapons was initially more plausible, though losing credibility by the day as the UN inspectors searched for evi-dence. Unfortunately it is more difficult to prove the absence of weapons than their presence.

Having invaded Iraq guns blazing, Bush had no plan for winning the peace. In the immediate aftermath of the invasion, there was goodwill in Iraq to those who had liberated them from a vicious tyrant. As with Sept. 11, this goodwill was squandered through a combination of inadequate planning, incompetence and heavy-handed tactics that could almost have been designed to aggravate resistance. Iraq is now full of terrorists who were not there before. Some flowed in through the permeable borders left by the failure to maintain an Iraqi infrastructure, others were recruited due to the ample reasons Bush gave them to resent the US.

As a result of this, not only have thousands of Iraqi, US, British and other coalition combatants died, but also many civilians -- Iraqi, US, British, Japanese, South Korean and more. Their deaths are all direct results of the actions and inactions of Bush.

Bush's Orwellian, on-going war against reality is only the start. The world is a more dangerous as a result of his scandalous denial of climate change, the Kyoto Treaty and other environmental issues. Even if I am not killed in a terrorist attack or caught in a war zone, my life will be directly affected by Bush's love-in with the oil producers and irresponsible rejection of a precautionary principle on climate change.

Few would question that the Bush administration has in general been pro-Taiwan. I love Tai-wan, and were the Chinese to invade tomorrow I am sure that there are many pan-blue politicians with little allegiance to Taiwan who would pick up their ever-so convenient US passports and leave long before I did.

But this cannot bring me to support a president who is a danger to the world both in terms of aggressive foreign campaigns, aggravating the terrorist threat and neglecting our global environment.

In his recent letter (Letters, Oct. 29, page 8), Alex Cross expressed his sentiments concerning US Secretary of State Colin Powell's lamentable comments on Tai-wan. I completely agree with Alex on the subject. However, I believe that his statement that the American people "by and large support Taiwan" is somewhat in error. I think, more accurately the statement should be, "The American people, by and large, know virtually nothing at all about Taiwan."

Our consciousness of Taiwan is tied mostly to the "Made in Taiwan" label on computer equipment and other electronics. Occasionally, as happened last week, we get a comic relief news story showing the esteemed members of the legislature throwing food at one another. Fortunately, half the people watching probably thought they were from Thailand.

All is not as grim as the picture I paint. Ignorance of the Taiwan issue is understandable: It's a big world with lots of problems and situations that don't immediately impact the day-to-day lives of the average American. What I can tell you from my own experience is that if you take the time to explain Taiwan's situation, people respond favorably to its plight.

I see that the Tourism Bureau is making a push to double European tourists by 2008. While I suspect that targeting European or Asian countries is a good way of increasing the actual tourist dollars spent in Taiwan, it would seem prudent to invest more time and effort appealing to US tourists. As Taiwan's biggest supporter, increasing the US public's awareness of Taiwan's attractive and friendly face can only benefit Taiwan.

Most people who buy travel guides never go to that destination, but we buy the books and read them anyway. We have The Travel Channel, a network that airs programs showcasing destinations that most of us will never go to, but we watch them anyway and dream. Most importantly, our awareness is raised.

I watch lots of travel programs. Have I ever seen one on Taiwan? No. Are there more than three or four books on the subject at the bookstore? No. Have I ever seen a TV commercial promoting Taiwan tourism? No.

Putting politically-oriented flyers out near the UN does little for the average person except raise awareness that Taiwan is contentious. It might generate a little sympathy, but only moti-vated activists are going to take someone else's problems to heart through such a campaign.

I've been to Taiwan several times. It's a beautiful, dynamic country with very friendly people. Find a way to show that face of Taiwan to the US.

PRECONDITIONS: Taipei and Beijing must engage in dialogue in order to build trust so that future agreements can be reached, a former Asia director of the NSC said
By Joy Su
STAFF REPORTER

Cross-strait dialogue should focus on stabilizing relations between Taiwan and China by addressing the fundamental lack of trust between the two countries, former senior US director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council (NSC) Kenneth Lieberthal said yesterday morning, citing concern about the possibility of military conflict in the Taiwan Strait.

"The way to stabilize [relations] is to work on concrete issues, one after the other, and build up trust ? I think at the core remains an underlying issue of fundamental mistrust," Lieberthal said.

Lieberthal was quick to add, however, that the agreement would have to be forged by Taiwan and China, saying that the US could only act to encourage the process. He also said the US would not "simply drop the TRA [Taiwan Relations Act] if an interim agreement were put into force, indicating that the US would not withhold arms sales to Taiwan under those circumstances.

Lieberthal elaborated on the role that the international community could play in the process.

Lieberthal pointed to the international community's role in ensuring that commitments made by both sides of the Strait are credible.

"Taipei may need all major countries to take the matter seriously [if Beijing uses force]. Beijing may require that Taiwan promise not to declare independence during [the negotiation] period, and all countries would cut ties with Taiwan if it does this," he said.

Lieberthal, currently a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution, was the keynote speaker at a conference on grassroots democracy and local government in China during the reform era. The conference was organized by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), National Chengchi University, and the Chinese Association of Political Science.

MAC Chairman Joseph Wu also compared President Chen Shui-bian's "peace and stability framework" with the concept of an "interim agreement," saying yesterday that its conceptual framework was similar to that of Lieberthal's proposal.

In a recent editorial in the Washington Post in April, Lieber-thal and co-author David Lampton, a China Studies professor at Johns Hopkins University, referred to the establishment of a "stability framework," but made no mention of an "interim agreement."

However, the editorial did point out that an agreement on the principles of the stability framework must be approved by the US, China and Taiwan.

In China's May 17 statement, the Office for Taiwan Affairs also re-ferred to a "framework for peace-ful, stable and growing cross-strait relations."

Lieberthal also explained that his proposal for an "interim agreement" -- introduced over seven years ago -- had not taken unification as the ultimate goal, as had been widely reported by the media at the time.

"[The proposal] was totally misreported in Taiwan. It is absolutely not what I had proposed. An interim agreement for 50 years, and at the end of 50 years, there is a start of discussions about the final status," Lieberthal said, re-ferring to a proposal he had made in February 1998 in a paper on cross-strait relations.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY: North Korea again blamed US `hostility,' while Iran said it was negotiating after the UN's atomic energy head asked for proof of their peaceful intent
AP , UNITED NATIONS

Challenged by the UN nuclear chief to prove their nuclear programs are peaceful, North Korea said it would scrap its "nuclear deterrence" if the US ended its hostile policy and Iran said negotiations with three European countries may "bring fruit."

But North Korea's deputy UN Ambassador Kim Chang Guk on Monday totally rejected the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), calling it "a political tool of the superpower."

He also accused Japan of allowing US nuclear weapons on its soil and South Korea of harboring nuclear ambitions -- allegations both countries vehemently denied.

Iran's deputy UN Ambassador Mehdi Danesh-Yazdi was less strident, but stressed that Tehran "is determined to pursue its inalienable rights to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes."

He also criticized the international community for targeting Iran's nuclear program while saying nothing about Israel's.

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei challenged both countries in his annual report to the UN General Assembly, urging Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program "as a confidence building measure" and North Korea to dismantle its nuclear weapons program or at least allow inspections to ensure it is "exclusively peaceful."

He expressed hope that Iran will decide to suspend enrichment before the IAEA board meets in Vienna, Austria on Nov. 25.

Britain, Germany and France have warned that most European countries would back the US' call to refer Iran to the UN Security Council -- where it could face possible sanctions -- if the Iranian government does not abandon all enrichment activities before the board meeting.

Uranium enriched to a low level can be used to produce nuclear fuel for electricity-generating plants, but if enriched further can be used to make atomic weapons.

Iran is not prohibited from enriching uranium under its obligations to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, but is barred from arms-related work.

Danesh-Yazdi said Iran has a right "to develop, research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes."

But he told the General Assembly that Tehran has voluntarily suspended enrichment activities since last November.

"Iran is also currently engaged in negotiations with France, Germany and Britain to reach mutual objective assurances on nuclear cooperation, transparency and non-diversion" of nuclear material, he said. "These negotiations will bring fruit if mutual understanding, political will and good faith prevail."

At the moment, there aren't any negotiations taking place on North Korea's program -- and the IAEA hasn't conducted any inspections in the country since December 2002.

ElBaradei said he was frustrated that six-nation talks involving the US, China, Russia, Japan and the two Koreas were not moving faster.

The goal is to negotiate a deal for the communist regime to dismantle its nuclear weapons programs in exchange for economic help and security guarantees.

But the process is at a standstill because North Korea refused to show up for talks scheduled for September.

"I'm telling the North Koreans again that the international community is ready to look into your security concerns, ready to look into your economic and humanitarian needs," ElBaradei told reporters. "But a prerequisite is for them to commit themselves to full, verifiable, dismantlement of their weapons program -- as they say they have a weapons program."