China’s fear on Dec 2, 2004

China's worries a self-imposed trap, MAC head says

LEGISLATIVE POLL: Contrary to China's concerns, a pan-green majority would actually help the DPP to develop cross-strait relations, the MAC chairman said
By Joy Su, STAFF REPORTER 

China's fears of a pan-green majority in the legislature is a trap they set for themselves, according to Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Joseph Wu in an interview published in the Chinese-language China Review yesterday.

"It seems that China is very depressed about the possibility of a pan-green majority in the Legislative Yuan. This is a trap that China set for themselves in observing Taiwan's elections," Wu said, saying that China had always taken issue with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

"In actuality, a solid majority in the legislature will enable the DPP administration to better develop cross-strait ties," Wu said.

He also issued a subtle warning against any moves to influence the outcome of elections, saying that such moves often resulted in the opposite of what had been intended.

According to Wu, the pan-green camp is not likely to come away with a stunning majority given the number of candidates the party nominated to run for office.

"I do not think the pan-green camp will have a huge victory, taking 60 or 70 percent of the legislative seats ? the [pan-blue] camp will also not be faced with just 10 or 20 percent of the seats," Wu said.

"The greens may see some improvement, but the outcome will not be disproportionately in their favor," Wu predicted in the interview, downplaying the impact of the election results on cross-strait ties.

Regarding the possibility of negotiations with China after the legislative elections, Wu pointed to the need to set aside "space for [political] ambiguity." Wu said that the "space for ambiguity" should draw from the remarks that China's former vice-premier and long-time foreign minister Qian Qichen  had made between 2000 and 2002.

Qian in three separate remarks stated that the three direct links between Taiwan and China did not have to be a political problem, but could rather be treated as an economic issue. According to Wu, Qian stated in October 2002 that Taiwan did not have to recognize the "one China" principle in order for the links to be established.

The links refer to the opening of trade, postal and transport relations with China.

"If there was space for ambiguity, then both sides could declare victory without asking the other side to accept conditions almost sure to be rejected," Wu said.

"We are not in a place to be overly optimistic right now, but at the same time we have no right to be too pessimistic either," Wu said.

According to Wu, cross-strait policies previously articulated by President Chen Shui-bian will receive further clarification after the Dec. 11 elections. Putting cross-strait issues at the center of pre-election debate could be detrimental to ties with China, he said.

Chen says Taiwan, US should foster trust

EXCHANGING PLEASANTRIES: President Chen Shiu-bian yesterday expressed his gratitude for the US welcoming his explanation of his stand on constitutional reform
By Huang Tai-lin  STAFF REPORTER , IN CHANGHUA COUNTY

Acknowledging the US' statement welcoming his remarks concerning his push for constitutional reform, President Chen Shui-bianyesterday expressed gratitude and appealed for more mutual trust and less suspicion between Taiwan and the US.

Chen made the remarks after US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher on Tuesday said that the US government welcome Chen's assurance on Monday to stick to his "four noes" promise.

"I've noticed the welcoming statement made by the US government with regard to my remarks about constitutional reform. Apart from expressing my gratitude, I hope we all would hold mutual trust and not harbor any sort of suspicions," Chen said while receiving visiting Utah Governor Olene Walker and her husband at the Presidential Office.

During the meeting with his US visitors yesterday, Chen reaffirmed his commitments to uphold his pledges made in his inaugural speech this year and in his Oct. 10 National Day address.

Chen reiterated that the biggest mission he takes upon himself is to normalize cross-strait relations during his term in office, as well as to pursue permanent peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.

Chen noted that there are at least 610 missiles deployed by China along its southeastern coast and aimed at Taiwan, and that the number of missiles are growing at the rate of 120 missiles per year.

Chen told his US visitors that Taiwan, other than working to enhance its military capability with the proposal of an arms procurement budget to the legislature, also hoped that the two sides of the Strait can reopen negotiation and engage in dialogue.

Should the pan-green camp win the majority in the legislative elections, it would promote the chances of reopening cross-strait negotiations, Chen said, adding that the next two years will be the key two years in this regard.

A former member of Utah's constitutional reform committee, Walker told Chen that she understood the difficulties of dealing with such matters and that she admired the effort Chen put in to push for constitutional reform.

Later last night, Chen took the stage at a campaign rally in Changhua County, stumping for Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative candidates.

Chen, who is also the DPP's chairman, told the crowd that he would be a lame duck if the pan-greens do not end up controlling the new legislature.

Chen appealed to voters for support so that the DPP, together with its political ally the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), could "achieve its goal of winning a stable pan-green majority in the new legislature and secure greater progress in reform."

At the venue, Chen also took the time to introduce the constituency's legislative candidates one by one, endorsing each of the five DPP legislative hopefuls.

DPP's Chang stresses importance of new constitution

By Jewel Huang STAFF REPORTER
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Secretary-General Chang Chun-hsiung yesterday told the Taipei Times in a special interview that he will reassure the director of the American Institute in Taiwan, Douglas Paal, at a dinner next Monday that Taiwan will not change the general provisions of the Constitution, and that the government will not contradict President Chen Shui-bian's five pledges when it conducts its constitutional reform.

"I will elaborate on the significance of a constitution applicable to Taiwan's future competitiveness and development," Chang said.

"The current Constitution was enacted in China in 1947. It neither fits in with Taiwan's present needs nor tallies with the reality of the objective environment," he said.

"If Taiwan wants to continue improving its competitiveness internationally and maintain long-term peace and stability, it is necessary for the nation to revise the Constitution," he said.

Chang said that a referendum is simply a procedure through which to accomplish constitutional reform, and promised that this procedure would never depart from the president's five pledges.

"The general provisions of the Constitution, including the coun-try's territory, official name and national flag, will also stay the same [when constitutional reform is implemented]," Chang said.

He also said that he had originally made this commitment to Paal one week before the presidential election on March 20, while the president later repeated it in his inaugural speech on May 20.

"We hope that the US State Department understands this and that this would change their misgivings about Taiwan's intentions," Chang said.

Meanwhile, Chang said that some of the nation's international friends could confuse the Taiwan Solidarity Union's (TSU) appeals to "change the country's name and write a new constitution" with those of the DPP, and that this could cause misunderstandings.

"Taiwan is a democratic society tolerating diverse opinions and all the people are free to express their own beliefs and viewpoints," Chang said.

"However, this doesn't mean that the TSU's platform equals the DPP's. I know clearly that they are different," he said.

Chang said that the DPP's "Resolution on Taiwan's Future" of 1999 established that Taiwan is an independent sovereign state whose name is "the Republic of China" and it is not a province or a special administrative region of the People's Republic of China (PRC).

Any changes regarding this independent status quo must be collectively determined by the people of Taiwan through a plebiscite, which is clearly stipulated in the resolution, he said.

The goal that the DPP needs to achieve at present, with the TSU's cooperation in the upcoming elections, is to become the majority in the Legislative Yuan, Chang said.

`I do not work with China': Lien Chan

POLITICKING: KMT Chairman Lien Chan threatened legal action against the president for claiming his party is laundering party assets and challenged Chen to provide proof
By Caroline Hong  STAFF REPORTER
 

Responding to accusations made by President Chen Shui-bian  on Tuesday, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) denied yesterday that it is working with China to influence the results of the upcoming legislative elections.

"President Chen Shui-bian is once again making up stories about China supporting the pan-blue camp. This is his habit during each election cycle," KMT spokesperson Chang Jung-kung said in a statement released late Tuesday night.

While campaigning for legislative candidates in Keelung on Tuesday, Chen said that the recent presence of KMT deputy spokeswoman Kuo Su-chuen  at a social dinner with Taiwanese businesspeople in Shanghai, China was proof that China was seeking to interfere in the Dec. 11 elections.

In a retaliatory press conference yesterday, Kuo defended herself against the allegations. While both she and her husband, Hung Hsi-yao, were at the dinner, Kuo said she was there only as a "polite gesture" in the hopes that Taiwanese businesspeople abroad would vote for the KMT.

Chen is inhuman for putting pressure on the KMT for such a little thing, Kuo said yesterday.

In his statement Tuesday night, Chang also criticized Chen as viewing Taiwanese businesspeople in China as "Communist China's puppets."

"Taiwanese businesspeople in China are also Taiwanese citizens with voting rights," said Chang. "It is natural, for these citizens that care about their country, to invite Taiwanese political figures over to explain the political situation to them," Chang added.

Another focal point of KMT retaliation against Chen yesterday were his accusations Tuesday that the KMT was trying to dispose of party assets through former KMT financial director Hsu Li-teh, and Chairman Lien Chan's son Sean Lien  Pointing to discrepancies between estimated value and rumored sale value of KMT-owned companies -- Hua Hsia Investment Holding Co and Central Investment Holding Co -- Chen said that Sean Lien and Hsu were using a number of capital companies as fronts to launder KMT party assets by making investments in China.

Sean Lien has previously worked for various international investment banks and is currently a vice president at the GE Asia Pacific Capital Technology Fund based out of Hong Kong. He is rumored to have a private fortune of at least NT$2 billion. Hsu is the former finance director of the KMT and vice premier.

While the Hua Hsia Investment Holding Co is valued at over NT$10 billion, Chen said, it is being sold for just NT$8 billion.

KMT Chairman Lien Chan hotly denied the allegations yesterday, while saying that Chen would have to face up to "legal consequences" for slandering the Lien family.

"This is ridiculous. Chen is attacking people without providing evidence. Even my family has become the target of his attacks," Lien said yesterday in Taipei while stumping for KMT legislative candidate Justin Chou.

Chen should provide evidence of his accusations, if he has any, Lien said.

Editorial: US need not rein in Chen

US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said recently he thinks President Chen Shui-bian should clarify whether his latest statements about a referendum and a new constitution violate his "four noes" pledge. Opposition parties and several media outlets hurried to add fuel to the flames by blaming Chen for once again having stepped over the line in the sand with regard to the US' Taiwan policy.

As the US is unable to distinguish between the political parties here, it is only natural for them to try to put down the brakes on referendum talk, and try to cool things down in order to avoid further tensions in cross-strait relations.

So has Chen overstepped his boundaries? Judging from his inauguration speeches in 2000 and this year, as well as the "10 points" he made during a speech last month, he seems to be standing firmly on his promise not to declare independence, change the national flag or title, or hold a referendum on unification or independence. But he has also promised the people of Taiwan a suitable new constitution during his term -- and that it will be decided via a referendum. At a quick glance, these two promises seem to be contradictory, but a more thorough look reveals his advocacy of amending the Constitution as being on the safe side of the US' "bottom line."

First, the Constitution in its current form was created in China, in 1947. It is a Constitution aimed at ruling the vast territories and population of China, Tibet and Mongolia, and as such it is of course unsuitable to the territory and people currently under its jurisdiction. The Constitution has been amended six times, but this piecemeal approach has failed to meet current needs. A one-time comprehensive constitutional amendment is necessary and also meets the public's expectations.

Second, in his May 20 inauguration speech, Chen stated specifically that since there was no domestic consensus over what to do about the national flag, national title and the territories mapped out by the Constitution, these would not be subject to amendment. As the symbols of the nation are not to be included in the discussions over constitutional amendments -- and any amendment will be confined to restructuring the administrative and political system -- then clearly Chen has not gone beyond the parameters set by the US.

The articles for constitutional amendment recently passed by the legislature include the dissolution of the National Assembly so that future amendments will be subject to approval through referendums. This is a legally required procedure in the amendment process. People should not be shocked when they see the words "constitutional amendment" and "referendum" together. A referendum is only a formality, and what is important is whether the nature of the proposed amendments fall within a respectable degree of tolerance. Washington is unable to distinguish between the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) "constitutional amendment referendum" and the Taiwan Solidarity Union's (TSU) "referendum on correcting the name of Taiwan and rewriting the Constitution."

The DPP advocates a constitutional amendment that will retain the country's national emblems, while the TSU advocates the creation of a new constitution for the nation of Taiwan. Because of this divergence over amendments and the creation of a new constitution, Chen and former president Lee Teng-hui have aired their differences publicly. Washington should not confuse the proposals of the DPP and the TSU, even though they are both a part of the pan-green camp.

Mainlanders, cast off your shackles

By Paul Lin Thursday, Dec 02, 2004,Page 8

On Oct. 12, former president Lee Teng-hui, speaking to legislative candidates of the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), said they should both sympathize and empathize with Mainlanders in Taiwan. He said people should help them throw off their constraints and obtain greater benefits. In this way, they would then be more favorable to both Taiwan and the TSU. Lee's greater goal is to have a population with at least 75 percent having a "Taiwan consciousness."

Lee's concern for second-generation Mainlanders in Taiwan is founded upon his desire to promote unity -- in effect mitigating the efforts of other politicians trying to fan the flames of ethnic division. The TSU can be considered a "deep green" in its political orientation; their local awareness is stronger than that of even the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

This is not, however, to say that they are being ethnically divisive. When we say "deep green" here we are referring to their deep conviction that China and Taiwan are separate entities. They are not trying to differentiate between ethnic identities within Taiwan itself.

The TSU are further to the green side of the spectrum than the DPP simply because the latter is currently in government and has to balance considerations deriving from cross-strait relations and relations between Taiwan and the US, as well as other domestic and international issues.

Unlike the TSU, the DPP is not free to look on these matters from a purely idealistic standpoint.

Certain politicians and public figures misrepresent the TSU's and Lee's ideas, but this is not necessarily because they are Mainlanders. It is because they see the "Taiwan issue" from China's perspective. In other words, the problem does not derive from ethnic relations within Taiwan, but from the relations between China and Taiwan.

Lee's concern for second-generation Mainlanders is indeed well founded. When Lee mentioned that Mainlanders are in need of throwing off their constraints to achieve more for themselves, I believe he is referring to the people who followed the late president Chiang Kai-shek to Taiwan after China's civil war, and -- with the exception of a number of high-ranking individuals -- underwent many hardships.

They worked hard for Taiwan, making a considerable contribution to its development, and so it is not only the second generation that needs to be considered, it is also the first generation, who still have a profound love for Taiwan.

I would particularly like to emphasize the question of helping them throw off their constraints. The constraints referred to here are for the most part psychological in nature. Certain politicians have accused Mainlanders and their children of "original sin," which naturally puts lots of pressure on them. They also use them as cannon fodder in their scramble for political advantage. This also puts a lot of pressure on them.

As a result we have seen that, in elections, many Taiwanese actually vote for pro-China politicians who have little or no local awareness, whereas some first and second generation Mainlanders actually cast their votes for pro-Taiwan candidates.

In many cases these people are looked upon as "heretics" -- Chen Shih-meng being a perfect example. I imagine that many second-generation Mainlanders who support the pan-green camp get little support from their families. It must be especially hard for them, and as a result they are all the more deserving of our concern.

Both my wife and I are well aware of this situation. I am from China, and my wife is a second generation Mainlander. Taiwanese in New York generally assume that we both support the pan-blues. In the last election we voted for the greens and, in addition to receiving threatening phone calls, we were also reproached in the streets for this. Just as I was branded a traitor by the Chinese communists, so was I condemned by some Taiwanese pan-blue supporters. Naturally, I find it very strange that they see eye to eye with Beijing on this.

So what did I actually turn my back on? I turned my back on the inhumane dictatorial system of the Chinese Communist Party.

After I arrived in Hong Kong, despite never specifically supporting independence for Taiwan, I never actually opposed it. During my 21 years in China I learned the real meaning of the fact that human rights are more important than who controls a country.

After I got to Hong Kong, I was against the return of its sovereignty to China, and the reason I respect Taiwan's right to choose its own future is that I would hope that others respect my right to do the same for myself.

So why did I finally choose to support the green camp? First, when China fired missiles into the seas off Taiwan in 1996, and with their subsequent threats of military force, it became clear to me that they had cut off their own route to achieving a peaceful unification.

Taiwan, however, wants to survive, and must therefore seek to be internationally recognized as a sovereign nation. Second, after losing the 2000 presidential election, Chinese Nationalist Party Chairman Lien Chan, in an exercise of self-preservation, turned his back on Lee's drive toward localization and started seeing things the same way as China.

If we had supported them, we would not only have been traitors to the people of Taiwan, but also to the democratic movement within China.

It was for these reasons that I came out as a supporter of those who represented peace and a democratic transition within Taiwan. In order to face the increasing threats from China; to prevent Taiwan's democratic, political and economic achievements being trampled on; and how to stop these dictators from swallowing up Taiwan is not only the responsibility of the people of Taiwan, it is the sacred duty of the people of China and of Chinese living abroad.

In the legislative elections the blue camp is naturally fielding Mainlander candidates. The fact that the greens have a number of second-generation Mainlanders has special significance. In addition to the DPP's Tuan Yi-kang seeking another term, the TSU is putting up Yin Chien-ying, Ling Tzu-chu and Liu I-de. If these candidates are elected it will be a great blow for the politicians who are trying to use ethnic differences to their advantage. It will also be a new development for the political scene in Taiwan, following the establishment of the Goa-Seng-Lang Association for Taiwanese Independence, and will be good for ethnic integration.

Taiwan's food production feeds its 23 million inhabitants, and its mountains, rivers and blue skies provide spiritual nourishment. If Taiwan is to have a bright future, the Mainlanders living there have to remove their psychological shackles, join hands with us, and welcome a new beginning.

Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.