N Korea’s nuclear program on Dec 5, 2004

N Korea boycotts nuclear talks

DEFIANT: North Korea yesterday said it would hold off talks over its nuclear program until Washington changes its `hostile' policy toward the hermetic country

AP , SEOUL
The key players in international efforts to curb North Korea's nuclear ambitions are picking up the pace in what has become a protracted ritual of talking about talks and discussing how to entice the North's recalcitrant government back into negotiations.

But the communist North dug in yesterday, saying its UN diplomats met US officials in New York on Tuesday and again on Friday, but concluded that Pyongyang should hold off on talks until a new US administration under President George W. Bush changes Washington's "hostile" policy toward Pyongyang.

"Our analysis of the results of the contact in New York prompts us to judge that the US side showed no willingness to change its policy toward us and intends to use the six-party talks as a leverage for forcing us to dismantle all our nuclear programs, including the nuclear development for a peaceful purpose, first,'' the North Korean spokesman was quoted as saying by the official news agency, KCNA.

Three rounds of six-nation talks aimed at persuading the North to halt weapons development have taken place since last year, but without a breakthrough. North Korea boycotted a fourth round scheduled for September, and analysts believed it was holding out for a change in the White House.

North Korea wants to maintain nuclear facilities for power generation and medical and agricultural research, but says it will abandon its nuclear weapons development if the US provides economic compensation and security guarantees. Washington has demanded an immediate dismantling of all the North's nuclear activities.

Since Bush's November re-election, diplomacy has resumed.

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Dai Bingguo met in Washington with outgoing US Secretary of State Colin Powell on Thursday, with the nuclear issue a key topic.

Before Dai's trip, China sent its ambassador for the nuclear dispute, Ning Fukui, to North Korea to sound out the North on the issue.

South Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Soo-hyuck arrived in Washington on Thursday, while President Roh Moo-hyun, on a visit to London, urged that the "six-party talks ... be reconvened as soon as possible."

Yesterday, North Korea said it was not in a hurry.

"As the second Bush administration has not yet emerged, we would like to wait a bit longer to follow with patience what a policy it will shape," the North Korean spokesman said.

The US wants the fourth round of talks to begin before February.

"The North Koreans hold the key to when the talks will take place," said Lee Kyo-duk, a North Korea expert at Seoul's Korea Institute for National Unification. "But they will wait until Bush completes his lineups for his second-term administration to have a clear picture of who they will have to deal with."

Paek Sung-joo, chief North Korea analyst at Seoul's Korea Institute for Defense Analysis, said talks would likely resume in the first quarter of next year, but probably only on the condition that Washington promises to resume free fuel oil shipments to the energy-starved North.

The US and its allies stopped those shipments after Washington accused North Korea in 2002 of running a clandestine nuclear program. North Korea retaliated by withdrawing from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and restarting its nuclear facilities frozen under a 1994 deal.

Nation's man in DC upbeat on ties

STARS ALIGNED: With likely political consolidation in Taiwan, China and the US, resumption of cross-strait dialogue could happen next year, David Lee argues
By Charles Snyder  STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON
 

Taiwan's de facto ambassador to Washington, David Lee , says he expects next year and 2006 to be a "window of opportunity" for the resumption of cross-strait dialogue, with the US playing the role of "facilitator."

He said the window could begin after next week's legislative elections are completed.

That election would complete a year of important political changes in all three parties involved -- Taiwan, China and the US -- and usher in a period free of elections.

Such electoral periods focus attention on domestic, rather that foreign affairs, and tend to limit the scope for discussion of sensitive issues, Lee said.

Over the past year, he noted, the US and Taiwan have gone through both presidential and legislative elections, and, in China, President Hu Jintao has consolidated his position by taking over the chairmanship of the Central Military Commission with the resignation of Jiang Zemin .

That made this year "a difficult year" in cross-strait relations, said Lee, whose title is representative of the Taipei economic and Cultural Representative Office in Washington.

"But in 2005 and 2006, we hope that we will see some window of opportunity to resume dialogue across the Taiwan Strait," Lee said in a luncheon address at a George Washington University symposium on Taiwan and Cross-Strait Relations in Washington on Friday.

With Hu and premier Wen Jiabao having enhanced their political positions, "I hope the leadership in China may seek this opportunity to engage in some substantive discussions," he said.

Such talks could be in the spirit of the 1992 Hong Kong formula in which both sides "set aside all controversial issues and instead engaged in discussions of substance."

While Washington has shunned the idea of acting as a mediator for such talks, Lee said that Washington "will probably choose to play the role of facilitator."

Lee also addressed the lingering concern in Washington over President Chen Shui-bian's political statements and actions in recent years.

He recalled that in the late 1980s and the 1990s, Taiwan was lauded "as an emerging democracy, a shining example of ... economic prosperity and democratization."

However, in the past four months since he arrived in Washington in late July to replace Chen Chien-jen, he said, he has "heard so many different voices" in Washington about Chen Shui-bian's policies and plans.

"In recent months, I have heard some criticism, blaming Taiwan for some of regional tensions, which I do not share," he said.

Lee conceded that many people in Washington feel that Taiwan's political "growing pains" are continuing.

He responded that "you have to realize that it has not been very easy, it has been a long way for Taiwan to reach where we are. The most important thing for us is to stick with the goal of democratization ... However, in the meantime, we have to do something to help alleviate some of the concerns, and the issues that exist between Washington and Taipei."

He also noted that "there is still a lot of concern in official Washington as well as in the think tanks and the academic community" about Chen's plans for constitutional reform.

"After the legislative election, the government will work with the US government, we will work with the people in the think tanks and the academic community to let you know better how we are going to approach constitutional reform." Lee said.

Lee described the Washington channels of communication between Taiwan and the US "efficient and effective."

While he does not have the authority to call the secretary of state, he does on several occasions called senior US officials in the middle of the night to relate important messages he receives from Taiwan.

"In the wee hours, they all talk with me and they all give me an initial reaction from the administration," he said.

On one occasion, he called an official deeply involved in US policy toward Taiwan in the middle of the night.

Clear plan needed on Constitution

By the Liberty Times editorial
President Chen Shui-bian  recently indicated that if the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is given a stable legislative majority on Dec. 11, he will definitely complete drafting and passage of a new constitution, as well as end the "forced implementation of the Chinese Constitution in Taiwan," among other absurd phenomena.

Chen also proposed a new timetable for the new constitution. At the end of the 2006, a referendum will be held to ratify Taiwan's first new constitution. On May 20th, 2008, the day that his second term ends and the next president is sworn into office, the new constitution will come into force.

Given that timetable, it is not hard to see that Chen is indeed pushing for the adoption of the new constitution out of a sense of mission.

He does not aim to revise the Constitution because of his personal needs, nor seeking to become a "super domineering" president. Chen has very clearly explained his goal in drafting the new constitution. It is based in the need to correct the problems, flaws, and incompatibilities of the current Constitution. Chen has emphasized that we need substantive constitutional reforms to tailor the document to our time, place and needs.

He has also indicated that he does not want to become trap-ped in a war of words over whether what he "really" intends to do is to adopt a "new" constitution" or "amend" the existing one. But the US seems to be skeptical. US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher pointed out on Nov. 29 that the US takes Chen's 2000 inauguration promises seriously and believes that these pledges should be respected.

He also reiterated Chen's promises word for word: not to declare independence, not to change the official name of Taiwan from the Republic of China, not to add the "state-to-state" model of cross-strait relations to the Constitution, and not to hold a referendum to change the status quo on independence or unification with China. As for whether Chen's new constitution will violate these promises, Boucher indicated that Chen should clarify that himself.

Chen gave an immediate response the next day during his meeting with visiting US representatives. According to Chen, the timetable he has given regarding the new constitution, in terms of direction and substance, is completely compatible with the existing constitutional and political system. Moreover, the direction and policy of the constitutional and political reforms addressed during his inauguration speech, Double Ten National Day speech, and National Security Council speech on Nov. 10 will not be changed during his term.

Boucher pointed out that the primary US interest is in maintaining stability in the Taiwan Strait and that the US opposes any unilateral change to the status quo. "We are opposed to any referendum that would change Taiwan's status or move toward independence," he said.

Boucher's statements indicate that the US is concerned about Taiwan's campaign to reform the Constitution. This concern stems from a misunderstanding about the new constitution: thinking that it entails a public referendum that moves Taiwan toward formal independence. It stems also from an inaccurate judgement about the situation in the Taiwan Strait.

The US wrongly believes that Taiwan is about to change the status quo, which could further heighten tension in the Taiwan Strait. In reality, there is absolutely no need for the US to feel skeptical about the president's timetable for the new constitution.

First, as we have repeatedly indicated, after decades of democratic and localized reforms, Taiwan has left behind its undetermined political status as well as rule by the alien regime. On this land, the 23 million Taiwanese people have their own government, military, judiciary, currency and officials and legislative representatives at all levels of the government. Taiwan has become an independent sovereign country.

There is no need to seek an independent status through referendum or a new constitution. But while Taiwan is independent, because of past oppression by the alien regime, the name of the country, national flag, national anthem, the Constitution's definition of territory and the government system continue to exhibit remnants of the "Greater China" ideology and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) rule.

These are obviously at odds with reality. This indicates that Taiwan is not yet a "normal" country. The campaign to push for a new constitution is a movement to normalize the country through drafting a constitution tailored to this time and place and to the demands of the people, so that Taiwan can become a country both in form and substance.

The goal in drafting the new constitution is to pursue a policy of "de-Sinicization" that will get rid of the absurdities left behind since the days of KMT rule, so that Taiwan can become a normalized country. This entails restructuring the nation's governmental and political system, which will highlight the coming of age of public consciousness about the country's sovereignty.

This is an internal matter. It is not against one country's interests nor significant to any international relationships. Why must others be concerned that Taiwan is about to unilaterally change the status quo and trigger tension in the Strait?

The US has not only remained friendly to Taiwan over the years, but has also helped maintain peace. So it is not hard to understand where the US is coming from in feeling concerned. However, Taiwan is an independent, sovereign country. The people of Taiwan have the right to pursue a better political and constitutional form of government, and seek to end political and constitutional chaos, free of meddling from any other countries. The US especially should be able to understand the democratic principle that power resides with the people. Taiwan's efforts to ratify a new constitution through a referendum exemplifies the spirit of democracy.

How can the US, out of concern about China's potential irrational behavior, not only fail to uphold justice but even succumb to joining communist China in oppressing a democracy? While we cannot agree with the way the US questions Taiwan's new constitution, we feel compelled to call on the Taiwan government to abandon Chen's 2000 inaugural pledges, or the so-called "four noes" policy.

Frankly, that policy was an effort to avoid Chinese aggression and provocation against the backdrop of the first ever change in Taiwan's ruling party. However, it is in essence a policy of self-effacement which hurts Taiwan's dignity and integrity. It is not something a sovereignty country would typically adopt.

Moreover, China has failed to show any appreciation for the policy in the four years since its initial utterance. Beijing continues to spare no effort in narrowing Taiwan's international space. Worse, the policy has become an obstacle to Taiwan's development. Beijing frequently interferes in Taiwan's internal affairs by citing Chen's pledges.

Taiwan's internal political and government reform has become an international event, making Taiwan look like the wrongdoer. In other words, the "four noes" have become Taiwan's self-imposed prison cell. Taiwan will only be able to move ahead freely when it loosens these restraints.

For Taiwan to become a normal country, drafting a new constitution is a must. Whether Taiwan can successfully adopt a suitable new constitution will have a fundamental impact on the sustainability of the country's development. Therefore, while the experience of other countries may be referenced, outside interference cannot be allowed.

Since reforming the Constitution will require the support of the majority of the people, the ruling party should no longer simply see the promise of a new constitution as some kind of campaign gimmick. Rather, it should submit clear, complete and carefully considered outlines and proposals about the structure, substance, functions and visions of the new constitution.

Give up the China dream

By Joel Linton

I have finally begun to be able to sympathize with the Chinese exiles who came to Taiwan with Chiang Kai-shek after World War II. They lost a dearly-held dream of a new, great, and modern national China. The communists robbed them of their dream and so they had to face a life of exile in Taiwan. No longer could they be called Chinese nationals, nor were they Taiwanese: they were stuck on the outside.

And so they tried desperately to cling to this dream of China even when they were on Taiwan soil foreign to them. They tried to remake Taiwan into their dream of China.

But as the saying goes, two wrongs do not make a right. These Chinese exiles robbed the Taiwanese of their own dream, the dream of Taiwanese self-determination after the Taiwanese had been freed of the rule of Imperial Japan.

These Chinese exiles subjected the Taiwanese to a pretend China and fifty years of military dictatorship, just as the Japanese had subjected them to their colonial rule.

That time is passing. If the Chinese exiles are willing to embrace Taiwan as their new homeland, then let's have done with the terms "Mainlanders" or "outside the province people."

If the exiles are indeed willing to make their home with us, let them also be called "Taiwanese." But if they cannot give up their dream of a China which history has passed by, then let them be called "Chinese exiles." We will wish them well, and work with them to promote democracy in China. And if democracy does take root in China, then one day we can give them a farewell party, so they can finally return to their homeland.

Even though I am an American, I am using the term "we" Taiwanese because I identify so closely with the people and the cause of Taiwan.

Unfortunately some of the Chinese exiles are so far from identifying with Taiwan that they act as if it does not even exist.

But that number grows smaller as the march of history goes forward.