APEC on Nov 23, 2004

Lee Yuan-tseh fails to deliver message

SPECIAL ENVOY: Taiwan's representative to the regional meeting met with the Chinese president, but did not make good on his pledge to stress Chen's peace overtures
By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER , IN SANTIAGO, CHILE
 

President Chen Shui-bian's special envoy to APEC did not stress the recent peace overtures made by Taiwan when he met with Chinese President Hu Jintao on Sunday.

Lee Yuan-tseh, the president of Academia Sinica, and Hu held a short but unprecedented meeting, but failed to discuss cross-strait matters.

"What happened was, at the APEC meeting Lee Yuan-tseh, the representative from Taiwan, came to President Hu and they did have a brief conversation," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Kong Quan said, according to news wire reports. "The core element of their conversation was that President Hu emphasized that the `one China' principle must be adhered to. So if Lee Yuan-tseh called the meeting cordial, it must be because they discussed the `one China' principle."

Lee declined to comment on Kong's allegation of his having discussed the "one China" principle.

While Lee said that he would reiterate the recent string of goodwill gestures extended by Chen when he met Hu, Lee said that he failed to do so on Sunday because as a scientist, he disliked repetition and he believed that Hu must have learned of the message from the media.

When asked whether Chen would feel disappointed over his failing to deliver the message to Hu, Lee said that he did not think the president would be disappointed.

"The time was so limited that it was hard to discuss such complicated issues [as cross-strait relations] and it's not the main purpose of my trip," he said. "I come here as a scientist representing Taiwan to discuss economic and scientific issues at an economic forum. I don't think it's appropriate to discuss such a complex issue in such a short time. Besides, it's the responsibility of the president to improve cross-strait relations."

Describing Hu as a friendly person and someone who can easily talk, Lee said that the atmosphere of their conversation was cordial, and he felt a sense of trust and goodwill from him.

As Chen has extended goodwill gestures to China in several occassions, Lee said that the ball is in Beijing's court.

"It's as if I like a woman so much that I want to marry her, but I won't be able to do it if she doesn't trust me," he said.

"The best thing for me to do here is to try to establish friendship and mutual trust with Hu. I know many people have a lot of expectations for me. I did my best, but I hope you realize that it's impossible for me to turn things around in a couple of days."

In other news, Japan will soon grant Taiwanese tourists a visa-free privilege, Lee said.

"Prime Minister Koizumi took the initiative to tell me that Taiwanese tourists would soon be entitled to visa-free entry," Lee said.

When asked whether the visa-free entry is a permanant measure for Taiwanese tourists or only a temporary move for the 2005 World Exposition in Aichi, Lee said Koizumi did not elaberate.

"Since our meeting was brief, we did not have enough time to discuss related details," Lee said.

The Sankei Shimbun, a major Japanese daily, last week carried a front-page story saying the Japanese government was working to grant Taiwanese tourists a visa-exempt status from next March until September in a bid to attract Taiwanese tourists to the Aichi exposition.

Japan has granted Taiwanese tourists a 3-day landing visa. For longer stays in the country, Taiwanese residents have to apply for a visa in advance.

Lee also met with Chilean President Ricardo Lagos Escobar.

Dangerous optimism

I appreciate your newspaper and especially the range and quality of opinions presented on your editorial page. But I feel the recent Liberty Times editorial, "Taiwan is sovereign but abnormal" (Nov. 21, page 8), makes some dangerous errors, ones which are not uncommonly heard in Taiwan.

Although the editorial is clearly set forth, it embodies three types of errors. The first is to present erroneous conclusions based on correct facts without distinguishing between the facts and the conclusions; the second is not to distinguish between de jure, de facto, and consensual independence and the third is to believe that "if I say it is so, then it must be so."

When Taiwan was relinquished by Japan at the end of World War II, the author correctly notes that the Japanese did not specify by whom it was to be governed. However, it is the author's assumption that this left the definition of Taiwan in limbo, and it seems to me highly unlikely that this was what any of the parties involved considered to be the case.

The most logical assumption would have been that Taiwan should have been returned to the entity which had governed it before the Japanese had controlled it -- even though the national identity of that state was currently in question. Since China had ceded Taiwan to Japan in 1895 by a treaty which many still feel to this day was unjust, the country to whom it was intended must have been China, regardless if that meant the Republic of China (ROC) or the People's Republic of China could not be determined at the time.

For occupied territories to be granted independence after their colonizers have been defeated is highly unusual, and as far as I am aware, was not the case with other territories at the end of the World War II.

At this point Taiwan is certainly acting as an independent and sovereign state, but the "abnormality" of this situation is that its de jure status is unresolved and there is no international consensus on its future course. The article states that Taiwan "has all the requirements of statehood," but it does not consider the latter two aspects of independence, without which de facto independence is likely to be only a temporary condition.

Finally, the article states that Taiwan should take on its own name, Constitution and UN membership. This may be a wonderful ideal, but it seems to ignore the political realities of the situation. Although Taiwan has been moving in the direction of self-determination for the past 50 years, China's views on the situation have not changed.

It is not unknown for a territory or a country to peacefully declare its independence, but by far the most common consequence is armed conflict -- as we have seen for many years. Chechnya is a good example.

I certainly do not mean to say that Taiwan should "hand the keys to the city gate" to China, and I have confidence that Taiwan's leaders are not lacking in diplomatic skills (despite recent remarks by the foreign minister). But I am concerned with what seems to be an epidemic of unrealistic optimism, as indicated by the article in question. This is an optimism which is not only unrealistic, but dangerous.

We might wish that the world respected and supported self-determination and individual liberties of sovereign states, but it appears the world does not work this way, as shown in Afghanistan, Iraq and other places too numerous to mention. Optimism is always necessary, but it must be supported by a more realistic view of the situation.

Thomas Baker  Cambridge, Massachusetts

Fight censorship

Maybe Taiwan should bring law suits against censorship in those countries constitutionally protecting free speech ("China forces APEC to scrap Taiwan ad," Nov. 18, page 1).

The ROC flag was forcefully removed first in Athens, then the UN, even in Taipei and now in Chile. Is the whole world becoming China's big censoring territory?

Instead of condemning China's human rights abuses, free speech included, the whole world is encouraging China to extend its evil power into their free societies.

Lawsuits filed in countries where censorship takes place, even if not successful, would force a government to examine itself -- not to mention their commitment to the people.

Of course, China is afraid the truth will come out through these ads. Taiwan is a sovereign, independent country. It is through the right of free speech that the truth can be known to the world -- which is precisely why free speech must be protected. These countries have nothing to fear in free speech, and have no business becoming China's partner in censorship.

If successful, maybe China will realize human rights are still the rules and values of free societies. Maybe China will think about improving human rights at home. If not, they can hole up in their "middle kingdom" and abuse only their own citizens or extend relations with North Korea or Syria, where humans rights abuses are common.

Chen Ming-chung  Chicago, Illinois

Repressive policy? You bet!

Over the past year, and more recently in the past couple of months, articles in various newspapers are reporting the difficulties facing foreign spouses and children born to foreign spouses here in adapting to the local environment and culture. In such reports, government officials and experts tell us of the importance of these inappropriately named "new Taiwanese" learning to speak, read and write Mandarin.

One plan suggested by the government: force foreign spouses to enter compulsory Chinese language courses. Wait a minute. Doesn't this sound like some sort of violation of civil liberties and a disregard for the basic rules of democracy? Since when do you have the right in a democratic country to force anyone -- with the exception of children -- to attend school? Could the government force any "not new" Taiwanese citizen to attend Chinese language schools? No. And I am sure that, like in developed countries, some people in Taiwan got bad grades in school in their mother tongue class, and could do with attending school again. Yet we do not see the government sending them back to school.

Basic rule of democracy: You have the right to make your own decisions. Foreign spouses of Taiwanese should have the right not to attend Chinese language courses, even if these are truly beneficial to them. These courses can be a plus to foreigners, but they must remain optional. Making such courses compulsory is to treat the "new Taiwanese" as second-class citizens, and doesn't grant them equal rights with regard to freedom.

Last but not least, I do recall hearing last year that the ROC does not actually have an official language endorsed by the Constitution. So what is the legal basis to make it compulsory to learn Chinese? How about Taiwanese? Or Hakka? In a mixed nationality marriage, if the children ought to be taught Chinese, shouldn't this be the responsibility of the Taiwanese parent?

Michel Theron  Tainan

KMT must shed symbols

If a poll were taken, it is likely that 90 percent of people would not be able to tell the difference between the emblem of the Republic of China (ROC) and that of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), for both are a white sun on a blue background. Both in color and design, the two emblems are almost identical, the only difference being that the rays of the sun in the KMT party emblem are longer than those in the ROC emblem. This might be intended to reflect the comparatively longer history of the KMT.

At a campaign rally on Sunday, President Chen Shui-bian rebuked the KMT for the similarity of the two emblems, saying that this was a legacy of the one-party state. He demanded that the KMT change its emblem within three months. If the party does not do so, Chen threatened to alter the National Flag and National Emblem Law after the Democratic Progressive Party wins a majority in the legislature, in order to force the KMT to alter its emblem. The president has asked the KMT to turn over the copyright of the national emblem, for he will no longer tolerate the KMT's attempts to confuse the symbols of party and nation. As in the case of the KMT's stolen assets, this is yet another operation aimed at separating Taiwan from the KMT. Taiwan needs to put the relics of the one-party state behind it if it is to carry on along the road of democratization.

There are virtually no historical examples in which a political party has used its emblem and its anthem as the national emblem and national anthem. When the ROC was established in 1912, its flag was a five-colored flag. It was not until 1928, after Chiang Kai-shek's northern expedition and his defeat of the warlords, that the KMT Central Standing Committee passed a bill to make the anthem, emblem and flag of the KMT those of the Republic of China (ROC), and in so doing passed the National Flag and National Emblem Law. This followed the Soviet model, in which no distinction was made between party and state and the party was exulted above the state. The aim of this was to achieve long-term authoritarian rule by the party.

Chiang wanted the KMT to rule for 10,000 years, but his political power was not built on the support of the people, so eventually the party revealed its feet of clay. The KMT was first drawn into a civil war in China, followed by a war of resistance, first against the Japanese then against the communists, before making a final retreat to Taiwan. But this did not change Chiang's belief in the supremacy of the party, so in 1954 he made amendments to the National Flag and National Emblem Law to further ensure that the KMT's flag and symbol were also those of the ROC.

At that time there were no other political parties to protest, because except for the Young China Party and the China Democratic Socialist Party -- which were both supported by the KMT -- all other political parties were outlawed, and anyone who wished to challenge this prohibition faced a prison sentence. But political power is a fundamental human right and the prohibitions of authoritarian regimes are by their nature temporary, for there will always be people outside the party who will work against them. In Taiwan's case, the KMT's ban on the establishment of political parties was lifted in 1988. If the KMT continues to be benighted by the symbolism of the ROC sharing the same emblem as the party, and does not seek to establish a real sense of identity with the people, then the KMT will yet again be rejected.

In demanding that the KMT change its party emblem, Chen is emphasizing that as the president of the ROC, he intends to remain true to the "four noes" of his 2000 inauguration speech and the fundamental ideas behind his "10 points" expounded earlier this year, namely that he would not create a new constitution or alter the ROC's territory. He is not only telling this to the people of Taiwan, but also broadcasting this information to the world.

Operation offers hope to others

RISKY PROCEDURE: A young boy is recovering well after undergoing the nation's first live liver transplant to use a new, untested method of reconstructing a vein
By Wang Hsiao-wen
STAFF REPORTER
 

An eleven-year-old boy named Yung Jun-jie, is the first person in the country to have a successful live liver transplant aided by a breakthrough method of vein reconstruction.

In a marathon 20-hour operation last month, surgeons at the Taipei Veterans General Hospital transplanted 35 percent of the liver of Yung's father to the ailing boy.

The boy is now recovering from Budd-Chiari Syndrome, a liver disease that threatened his life and is caused by a blocked vein.

"To help patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome, we have conducted six operations in which we took the liver from the deceased. But Yung is the very first case of live liver transplant," said the child's doctor, Liu Jun-shu.

According to the team of surgeons that conducted the operation, the success is encouraging for other patients stricken by venous illness.

"In patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome, the blood cannot flow back to the heart smoothly through the heptic vein," Liu said. "The disease could lead to hepatomegaly [enlarged liver] and liver failure."

Although Taiwan has seen numerous successful cases of live liver transplants before, Yung's case demonstrated surgical finesse in reconstructing a new vein to replace the child's blocked vein.

In live liver transplants, surgeons traditionally reconstruct veins with artificial material.

In Yung's case, however, an artificial vein would have been vulnerable to further infection.

Also, it would not be able to grow as the child ages.

For those reasons, experts decided to rebuild a 12cm-long inferior vein from kidney to heart with Yung's jugular vein.

The complex procedure poses ethical as well as medical challenges. Live liver transplants carry significant risks for both the donor and recipient, said Lung Jie-quan, a surgeon and the secretary general of the hospital's organ transplant committee.

"About one in 200 patients die within a year after the operation," Lung explained.

The vein reconstruction further increases the surgical risks.

"Since this is the very first case of a live liver transplant with vein reconstruction, we don't know the survival rate of this complex surgery," Liu said.

At the prognosis before the surgery, Yung's parents were informed that their boy could die on the operating table.

But the parents decided to go through with surgery anyway.

"We want to seize every chance to cure him," Yung's father said.

With the organ shortage growing, patients like Yung do not have many alternatives.

While there are some 5,600 patients waiting for organs, only 1,300 donors are available, according to the latest statistics from the non-official Organ Procurement Association.

China's diplomacy of distraction

By Wang Kun-yi
As part of his scheduled trip to the APEC meeting concluded Sunday in Santiago, Chile, Chinese President Hu Jintao had planned to visit four countries in Latin America, including Brazil. In addition to being anxious about the outcome of the APEC meeting, Taiwanese people are also concerned about issues like whether China will once again use the model of "visiting diplomacy" to shift the cross-strait diplomatic battle to Central and South America.

In the past, Taiwan was able to safeguard its diplomatic space in Central and South America. Rather than perceiving this as effective dollar diplomacy, it would be more pertinent to say that it was a result of the US' Monroe Doctrine, which was used to restrict the rising China from dragging the cross-strait battle into Central and South America.

The situation, however, seems to be gradually changing. Under Hu's strategy to limit Taiwan's participation in the international environment, Taiwan's high-ranking government officials repetitively use visits to Central and South America as a reason to make a stopover in the US, for the purpose of disseminating anti-China opinion.

This has long irritated China; therefore, if China can play a greater role diplomatically in Central and South America, Taiwan's hopes of having a presence in the international community will be ruined.

It is also part of China's strategy as a way to expand to the next town after the successful deployment of its security officers in Haiti [Taiwan's ally] recently. Hu's Central and South American visit was merely a tactic to use as many opportunities as possible before considering anything else.

Does the Monroe Doctrine no longer apply to China? We can only say that China's incessant proclamations over a possible war caused by Taiwan's independence have put profound pressure on the US; therefore, it has had no choice but to follow China's pace. It has become apparent since US President George W. Bush's re-election that resolving the situation in Iraq, the nuclear crisis in North Korea, and others all need China's joint effort. As a result, the US may not think it is a good idea to keep Hu out of Central and South America. This is a kind of international reality.

The greatest threat to Taiwan's diplomatic space is China's ambition to cross the borders of the ASEAN. In cooperation with Australia's policy to go north, China wants to reach out to New Zealand and Australia, and from there, pin down south Pacific islands to prevent them from leaning toward Taiwan. If China is allowed the opportunity to build relationships with Central and South American nations and control nations of the south Pacific Ocean, it will cause even more diplomatic hardship for Taiwan in the region.

As a result, we cannot take Hu's visit to Latin America lightly. Every single step China takes in the international community has a purpose: not only in accumulating the international strength all powerful nations require, but also, more importantly, in hindering Taiwan's diplomatic expansion.

Therefore, while Taiwan is exerting its best efforts to go east of the Pacific Ocean, China is also adopting a strategy to go east as an attempt to pull the cross-strait diplomatic battle to Central and South America. This is our greatest concern for Taiwan's future diplomacy.

Wang Kun-yi is an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies, Tamkang University.

Debate heats up over claims to the sun

IDENTITY ISSUE: The KMT said it will not give in to demands that it change its party emblem, saying the government should change the national flag instead
By Caroline Hong
STAFF REPORTER , WITH CNA

The question of whether changes should be made to the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) party emblem became the subject of controversy yesterday, with the Executive Yuan promising to revise the National Emblem Law to allow the changes.

The KMT's emblem's similarity to Taiwan's national emblem -- and therefore the national flag -- became a hot topic of debate on Sunday night after President Chen Shui-bian demanded the KMT change its emblem within three months to eliminate the confusion between the two symbols.

The KMT said yesterday that Chen's real problem was with the national emblem -- in keeping with his pro-independence tendencies. Party officials said the KMT would not give into pressure.

The Executive Yuan, however, said that it was looking for ways to revise the law to make sure the KMT falls in line.

The KMT's emblem features a 12-pointed white sun on a blue background symbolizing the sky.

The flag has the white sun-blue sky in its upper-left corner, with a crimson background.

While the government has no plans to change the flag, said Cabinet Spokesman Chen Chi-mai, the Executive Yuan will soon start work on revising the National Emblem Law.

Clarifying the president's position, Chen Chi-mai said the government is not going to change the flag but will instead see to it that the National Emblem Law is amended within three months to pave the way for it to legally require the KMT to change its emblem.

According to the National Emblem Law, the national flag belongs to the government of the Republic of China and should not be used "commercially" by anyone else, Chen Chi-mai said.

He also noted that the Trademark Act stipulates that the national flag, national emblem or any pattern that is similar to the two cannot be used as logos or trademarks for any organization.

Based on this, he said, the KMT has been using its logo illegally.

KMT spokesman Chang Jung-kung said the party didn't need to wait three months to give its answer.

"We can answer right now -- we will not change our party emblem. After political power changed hands in 2000, [the administration] changed the nation's emblem to the outside world. So Chen's goal should be to change the nation's emblem, not the party emblem," Chang said at the KMT's headquarters in Taipei.

"If Chen is unhappy that the national emblem is similar to the party emblem, then we welcome the Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] to embrace the national emblem in its party emblem," he said.

He said that since the DPP became the ruling party, the government has been slowly phasing out the use of the national emblem on official documents and its use by government agencies such as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The KMT legislative caucus also said that the president should be taking issue with the national emblem instead of the KMT's -- even though it called his remarks mere election rhetoric.

At a press conference in the legislature yesterday KMT caucus whip Huang Teh-fu pointed to a poster displaying four different emblem and/or flag designs and called on the president to choose a new national emblem.

"All these flags have been proposed or used in the past. We give Chen Shui-bian three days to make a choice," Huang said.

The choices included the KMT party emblem, the national flag, a red, yellow, blue and white flag with black horizontal bars, and a flag similar to the current one but with a green background instead.

According to the Government Information Office's Web site, the five-color flag was used by the Shanghai army before 1911 to represent the five main ethnic groups of China.

According to Huang's research office, the flag with the green background was proposed in 1951 by Aboriginal groups as a possible national flag design.

Huang said that the difference between the national and KMT's emblems was clear because of the different size of the 12-pointed suns.

Huang said the KMT would not try to stop the government from changing the national emblem. He warned that the government would have to take full responsibility for the consequences of such a move, which the outside world might view as pro-independence.

DPP legislator wants `happier' anthem

CNA , TAIPEI
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus whip Lee Chun-yi said yesterday that he would like to see a "happier and lighter" national anthem.

Lee said that the national anthem -- which was the party anthem of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) -- was composed nearly 80 years ago, and that it is "heavy" both in terms of tune and lyrics.

According to Lee, even People First Party Chairman James Soong has on at least one occasion criticized the national anthem as confusing, saying that the first and second lines mix the nation and the KMT together.

The anthem first declares the "Three Principles of the People" to be the foundation of the party and the nation, and then calls upon the party members to be brave, earnest and unrelenting in striving to fulfill the nation's goals.

Since there is no law yet to regulate the anthem at the moment, Lee said he would be very pleased to see all the parties from across the political spectrum come together to consult one another on whether and how to revise the national anthem to make it more cheerful and light-hearted.

The words of the anthem were first delivered as part of a speech at the Whampoa Military Academy's opening on June 16, 1924, by Sun Yat-sen .

Sun's exhortation was designated as the KMT's party song in 1928, after which the KMT then solicited contributions from the public for a tune to fit the words.

The melody submitted by Cheng Mao-yun was chosen from among 139 contenders.

The tune, with the Whampoa exhortation, was temporarily adopted as the national anthem in the late 1920s before being officially announced as the national anthem in 1937. The piece was honored as the world's best national anthem at the 1936 Berlin Olympics.