Lee urges public to attend march for arms procurement

BY JEWEL HUANG

STAFF REPORTER

Former president Lee Teng-hui yesterday urged the people of Taiwan to participate in a parade to be held on Sept. 25 in Taipei to voice their objection to the opposition parties' boycott of the arms procurement package and show their resolution to resist an invasion by China.

The event's organizer, the Hand in Hand Taiwan Alliance, invited Lee, Examination Yuan President Yao Chia-wen and Northern Taiwan Society chairman Wu Shuh-min to attend a promotional event for the march yesterday.

Pro-independence campaigners at the event reiterated that it was important to create a new constitution and rectify the country’s official name, saying that these two steps are the fundamental keys to solving the problem of Taiwan’s national status.

Lee said in his speech that although a tangible armed force is important to Taiwan, intangible psychological defenses are also needed to resist China's psychological war.

He said that the tricks China is using in its campaign to unify with Taiwan are becoming increasingly flexible and diversified, and that the people of Taiwan cannot afford to lower their psychological defenses against China just because Beijing is seemingly offering some benefits.

"China has changed its strategies concerning Taiwan since Chinese President Hu Jintao took up his post. Beijing abandoned former Chinese president Jiang Zemin's strategy of intimidation in favor of making seemingly favorable promises that mask an evil intent," Lee said.

Lowering tuition fees for Taiwanese students, giving away pandas and offering duty-free imports for some kinds of Taiwanese fruit are the bait that China is using to shatter people’s psychological defenses, he said.

While the rest of the world was denouncing Beijing’s "Anti-Secession" Law, the leaders of the Chinese Nationalist Pam' (KMT), People First Party and New Party visited China, offering themselves up as pawns to promote Beijing's policies, Lee said.

"The menace China represents to Taiwan will only increase. If we do not speed up the progress of writing a new constitution and rectifying the country’s official name, Taiwan’s sovereignty and national status will be jeopardized" he said.

Pan-blues a disloyal opposition

Once again, the pan-blue dominated Procedure Committee blocked the arms procurement bill from being placed on the legislative agenda.

At the meeting Tuesday in advance of the new legislative session starting next week, the committee also stonewalled on the confirmation of President Chen Shui-bian's Control Yuan nominees, the retirement-fund bill and the amendment to the State-Owned Properties Law, voting to keep them off the agenda for the session that begins next Tuesday.

This replay of the same stale scene at the Procedure Committee leads one to wonder whether the opposition will ever realize what it means to be the "loyal opposition," and whether it can prioritize the national interest.

A glance at the US Senate's recent response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster puts Taiwan's opposition to shame. The Senate last Thursday night convened an emergency session to approve an US$10.5 billion emergency budget request from the Bush administration for relief for victims of the disaster. The emergency money was unanimously approved.

In comparison, the pan-blue camp consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) having continuously blocked policy initiatives launched by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government regardless of their urgency. They seem to enjoy their slim majority in the 225-seat legislature and use it to serve their party interests rather than serving the public, whose votes sent them to the Legislature Yuan in the first place.

In the face of China's rise, especially its military expansion, Taiwan must beef up its self-defense capabilities.

Yet, due to the opposition from the pan-blue camp, the budget for arms procurement has been blocked for two consecutive legislative sessions, on 26 separate occasions, according to President Chen.

In a goodwill gesture to the opposition parties, the government has adjusted the arms bill by funding the Patriot anti-missile batteries from the regular budget instead of from the special budget, as originally proposed.

But the opposition continues to be hogtied by political gamesmanship, and lets party interests push it as far as to sabotage Taiwan's national defense in the face of Beijing's growing military threats.

KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou has pledged to lead his party to victory in 2008 and regain the Presidential Office. Yet his fellow pan-blue camp members are rejecting the government's proposed bills and policies without even giving them a chance to at least make it onto the legislature agenda for reasonable debate and deliberation. Don't they realize what a bad example they're setting for the DPP should it again become the opposition, and the KMT become the governing party?

After their meeting yesterday at KMT headquarters in Taipei, Ma and PFP Chairman James Soong jointly stated their preference for blocking the US arms package, with Soong saying that the PFP "will certainly not let this wasteful weapons purchase pass during this session."

Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng, a KMT heavyweight, said recently that the legislature should begin to deal with the arms procurement bill when the new session open. Apparently, Ma and Soong don't yet see eye to eye with Wang on the issue.

China bound to increase meddling

By Nat Bellocchi

`The US and China could become involved much more deeply than before in Taiwan's domestic affairs, but for different reasons.'

In Washington, among those who are involved in the three-sided cross-strait relations, there is seldom -- if ever -- a consensus on what is best for US interests. Despite occasional reports by the executive branch to the US Congress and the public, even the appearance of consensus never exists for very long, due to the increasing complexity of cross-strait relations.

Starting with last year's presidential election in Taiwan, which reinforced the ruling party, and then the legislative elections which deflated it, many experts in the US went from being deeply concerned about where Taiwan was going (provoking China) to being concerned about where it wasn't going (strengthening its security).

In Washington that is the classic division of consensus -- worry about China or worry about security.

This year Beijing changed the atmosphere when it sought domestic approval for its "Anti-Secession" Law. While the pan-green camp had been the "troublemaker" last year, China now had become the troublemaker and Taiwan the reasonable player. Taiwan's government did an unusually good public relations effort gaining wide support internationally and at home for condemning that law.

There was little time before yet another cross-strait related action emerged. This time it was a domestic issue in Taiwan which was carried to China. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and then other opposition parties' leaders began a series of visits to China. They received an unusually high level of attention in China, including presidential meetings, and were allowed a high level of media attention as well.

Agreements were made for future party liaison with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and in receiving offers to increase trade and other favorable actions, but not through Taiwan's government.

Since there are no laws prohibiting such behavior by political parties, the government and the ruling party were clearly unsure of itself, and the body politic of Taiwan seemed to be in complete confusion.

The results of the election for the National Assembly went to the ruling party, which helped calm the confusion somewhat. What that meant politically, however, remained unclear for two reasons.

The liaison and the commitments made between opposition parties and the CCP could not only undermine the ruling party, which has been the opposition's first priority, at any cost, since the year 2000, but could also permit more intrusive actions by China in Taiwan's internal affairs.

During the visits of the opposition leaders to China, the newly established liaison between the CCP and the KMT included an agreement to establish a line of communications. At the same time, the Chinese hosts made no changes to their fundamental requirements -- the "one China" principle, the absolute power of Beijing, or its ongoing military threat, for example.

Beijing is not likely to do so. It may well be positioning its efforts to be sure the present administration in Taipei fails, and that the next election delivers a much friendlier administration, more accommodating to Beijing's objectives. If that materializes, conceivably the US and China could become involved much more deeply than before in Taiwan's domestic affairs, but for different reasons.

The other reason for hesitation following the National Assembly's actions was that a very high profile, first time election was soon to be held within the KMT to choose a new chairman.

With many critical laws stalled in the legislative by the pan-blue parties, what direction the results of this election would take was important. Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou, who pledged to initiate a broad reform within the party, was the winner.

This was well received regardless of partisan membership, though it covers support for anti independence and acceptance of a "one China" policy which may be unacceptable to many if not a majority of voters.

Within the party, in addition, there are limits among the long standing elites about just what reforms would be acceptable, but in any event regaining power will be the top priority.

It may take some time before it is clear just how great an impact this "Visit China Strategy," the results of the National Assembly election and the change in the KMT chairmanship will have on the body politic of Taiwan.

Between now and the next presidential election in 2008, there will be a county-city election, a redistricting of constituencies to accommodate the smaller 133-member legislature, an election for the new legislature in 2007 and new faces campaigning for the presidency thereafter.

There seems now a perception among many that the results of the last legislative election, and more recently several statements by some analysts in Taiwan and abroad that independence is no longer a viable option and should be dropped, has caused mainstream of public opinion to shift in that direction.

That an option, no matter how viable, should be dropped before any negotiations take place is surprising.

The ruling party has not been very effective in challenging these views, however. In the struggle between the two political groups -- pan-green and pan-blue -- during the events that lay ahead of the next presidential election, how much further along real consensus on the cross-strait issue will be remains uncertain. It will almost surely mean that China's involvement in Taiwan's domestic affairs will become even more intrusive, however, something both the US and Taiwan must ponder.

In the East Asia region, changes that impact on fundamental national interests of several countries, including Washington, Beijing, and Tokyo, are likely to continue, adding to the uncertainty.

In Washington, seeking consensus on US policy for this volatile region, including the cross-strait issue, will make policy decisions even less predictable than today.

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