Japanese to mull giving its military expanded freedom

MANDATE: With its confidence high after its recent electoral triumph, Koizumi's government will consider amending its 1947 Constitution

AP , TOKYO

Empowered by a landslide election victory, Japan's ruling coalition will form a special committee next week to discuss constitutional changes that would give the military more freedom to act overseas, an official said yesterday.

The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and its junior coalition partner, the New Komei Party, reached a basic agreement with the top opposition group, the Democratic Party of Japan, to form the parliamentary committee, lower house spokesman Masakazu Tobashi said.

The committee will discuss legal procedures needed to amend the Constitution, which has never been done since the charter was enacted in 1947.

"Debate on whether to go ahead with amendments would come later," Tobashi said.

The LDP backs changing Article 9 of the Constitution -- known as the pacifist clause -- to more clearly define the military's right to aid allies and take part in peacekeeping missions overseas.

Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, a strong supporter of US policy in Afghanistan and Iraq, has already dispatched non-combat troops to both areas under special laws which may be extended for a second time later this year.

Koizumi's stance has sparked fears in neighboring countries about a resurgence of Japanese militarism, which still haunts much of Asia 60 years after the end of World War II. Critics at home say the dispatches violate the Constitution.

The prime minister appeared to back away from the issue after securing a landslide victory in lower house elections last Sunday, saying he didn't have enough time left in office to achieve it.

He is scheduled to step down next September.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, drafted by US occupation forces after World War II, prohibits the use of force in settling international disputes.

The Japanese government has interpreted that to mean the country can possess armed forces for self-defense, and maintains a 240,000-strong Self Defense Force.

Taiwan a model for Asia: Chen

DEMOCRATIC BEACON: The president said that the nation will struggle on to consolidate its gains so it can continue to inspire political reforms elsewhere

BY CHIU YU-TZU AND JEAN LIN

STAFF REPORTERS

Taiwan will step up its efforts to consolidate its political system as a tool to drive democratization in Asia, because the stability of the region has been jeopardized by several countries -- including China -- which are resisting democracy, President Chen Shui-bian said yesterday.

Chen made the remarks while giving the opening speech at the first biennial World Forum for Democratization in Asia (WFDA) which began yesterday in Taipei and runs through today.

The president said that an ongoing worry in Asia is the persistence of non-democratic political systems.

"For the sake of both peace and prosperity, driving democratization in Asian countries and supporting civil society in the Asian region are crucial," Chen said.

Regional stability has been jeopardized by the actions of several non-democratic regimes, including North Korea's development of nuclear weapons, Myanmar's oppressive dictatorship and China's deployment of hundreds of missiles targeting Taiwan, the president said.

"China has placed people across the Taiwan Strait under the shadow of a war. The imbalance in military strength threatens not only the democratic system embraced by 23 million Taiwanese people but also Asian regional safety and order," Chen said.

A light to nations

He added that Taiwan's democratization sets a good example for other countries, pointing out that Taiwan was the first Asian country to establish a national democracy assistance foundation -- the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD), launched in 2003 by an initiative supported by the Legislative Yuan. In addition, Chen said that Taiwanese democracy has been a foundation of long-term peace and stability in the region, and a great asset treasured by international society.

Taiwan has to take on the duty of opening up a closed society in Asia, assist democratization in other countries controlled by autocratic regimes, and strengthen the roots of democracy in democratized countries, Chen said.

Of great attention on the conference's agenda yesterday was the Leaders Forum which included former president Lee Teng-hui, called the "founding father of modern Taiwanese democracy" by Michael Kau, president of the TFD.

Democracy besieged

Lee pointed out in his speech the probable factors leading to the erosion and weakening of democracy in Taiwan.

One of the main reasons, Lee said, was the election of parties that are anti-democratic, relying on ideology rather than the people's will. Democracy, Lee added, should be enforced by law and order.

The factors facilitating Taiwan's democratization are its particular history, the courage of its immigrants, vibrant economy, political activities and the existence of opposition parties and leaders that have been committed to bringing democracy to Taiwan, Lee said.

Concluding his speech, Lee shared his advice for deepening democracy in Asia. The existence of democratic neighbors in the region would help spread democracy in the area, he said.

"Taiwan is a model of freedom and democracy for other countries in Asia," Lee said. "These countries should support each other to bring democracy and human rights to non-democratic countries."

In addition, the government must continue educating people so they can continue to enjoy democratic freedoms, understand and respect human rights and learn new democratic values, Lee added.

Political equality and the equal distribution of wealth and social welfare are also ways to consolidate democracy, Lee said.

Democratic struggles

The former presidents of the Dominican Republic and El Salvador and the former prime minister of Mongolia also shared their countries' struggles to democratize.

Chee Soon Juan, chairman of the Alliance for Reform and Democracy in Asia (ARDA) said he was pleased about the establishment of WFDA. Chee is also the maker of a short documentary on democracy in Asia, which was shown at the conference, and parts of which have been banned in his home country Singapore.

"[WFDA] is an institute of democracy which we can call our own," Chee said. "We must have faith and patience. Democracy will come to those who seek it."

The conference will also discuss strategies to assist with democratic transition and consolidation in Asia, the impact of China's rise on regional democratization, the political participation of Asian women and improving political accountability in Asian democracies.

Congressman pushes to see Chen in Washington

RIGHTS AWARD: President Chen Shui-bian will receive an award from the US Congress' Human Rights Caucus, but holding the ceremony in the capital will likely draw fire

BY CHARLES SNYDER

STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON

The chief sponsor of a US congressional resolution welcoming President Chen Shui-bian to the US next week has called on the Bush government to allow Chen to travel to Washington to receive a human-rights award from the Congressional Human Rights Caucus.

But the Bush administration might object to the way the award is presented in view of China's expected opposition.

Chen will overnight in Miami on Tuesday en route to Central America and the Caribbean.

There, he will be presented with the award by the caucus, an important congressional group which consists of some 150 House of Representatives members, a majority of the total House membership.

But the US State Department demanded that there be "no public or media events" during Chen's transit, raising the possibility of a clash between the congressional backers of Taiwan and Chen on the one hand, and the administration on the other.

On Wedenesday, caucus staffers said they could not yet give details of plans for the ceremony, since the day of Chen's arrival is a working day for Congress, making it difficult for members to be out of Washington.

As a result, it is not clear whether there will be a formal ceremony, who the participants will be, and whether Chen will have an opportunity to make a public speech.

According to one congressional staffer, the award will read: "The Congressional Human Rights Caucus presents the Human Rights Award to His Excellency Chen Shui-bian, President of the Republic of China on Taiwan, in recognition and appreciation of his outstanding dedication to internationally recognized human rights and the promotion of political freedom and human rights throughout the Asia-Pacific region."

The State Department on Wednesday said that: "We understand that President Chen's activities will be private and unofficial, consistent with the transit ... We understand that there will be no public or media events."

A department spokesman noted that the Bush administration approved Chen's transit "based on the criteria we've used for past transits -- safety, comfort and convenience -- while respecting the dignity of the traveler."

Pressed about the Human Rights Caucus' plans for the ceremony, a department spokesman said only that, "I was told that it was our understanding that there were to be no public events. As far as whether there is something like that, I cannot say."

Republican Representative Steve Chabot, a co-chairman of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus who last week introduced a resolution in the House welcoming Chen's visit, said that the awards ceremony should be in Washington rather than Miami.

"I feel strongly that President Chen should be able to come here to Washington, DC, just as high-level officials from other countries do," Chabot told Taiwanese reporters after attending a signing ceremony for agreements in which Taiwan will import billions of dollars worth of US farm products.

"I think it's unfortunately long overdue that President Chen should be able to come right here to Washington," he said, noting that members of Congress had to go to New York when Chen transited through that city en route to Panama in October 2003, and would now have to travel to Miami.

During that New York trip, Chen received a human-rights award from the International League for Human Rights. The award was presented at a gala dinner where Chen delivered an address that incurred the wrath of China and ushered in a period of frosty US-Taiwan relations.

The House International Relations Committee scheduled a vote on Chabot's resolution for yesterday, and it was expected to be approved overwhelmingly. It will then go to the full House, where it may be taken up as early as this Tuesday, the day that Chen arrives in Miami.

After Miami, Chen will visit five Caribbean and Central American allies. He will stop in San Francisco on Sept. 28 on his way home.

Clearing the line to Washington

Clarity is a powerful thing. And events in the last week have offered Taiwanese some real clarity on how change can be both desirable and ominous.

The shenanigans in the legislature this week may hardly surprise locals or overseas observers with a rudimentary knowledge of Taiwanese politics. However, the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) mission to humiliate underperforming Premier Frank Hsieh and disrupt as much government business as possible comes as a disappointment, given the -- perhaps naive -- expectation held by many on both sides of the political fence that KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou would steer his party in a more rational, positive and -- heaven help us -- democratic direction.

Although there has been movement of sorts on the arms-procurement bill, the KMT has again blocked its discussion in committee and on the legislative floor, reinforcing the fact that the KMT will simply do the bidding of its spiritual masters in Beijing until national security is damaged beyond repair.

Same old stuff -- and it is difficult to predict when, or even if, this gridlock is going to end.

The brief visit to Taiwan by Dana White, the country director for Taiwan in the US Office of the Secretary of Defense, is therefore a welcome tonic. White came to finalize high-level security talks between Taipei and Washington that were originally canceled because of the scheduled visit to the US by Chinese President Hu Jintao. But the initial cancelation -- a painful and demeaning slap in the face for Taiwan -- points to an unsettling change stateside: a growing tension between pro-China and pro-Taiwan forces in the Bush administration, with the former prevailing.

The mantra of protecting the "cross-strait status quo" has been chanted by officials in all countries involved, but until such time that those US officials mired in an Orientalist devotion to a utopian Chinese state recognize that the "status quo" can be maintained neither passively nor indefinitely, the eroding of both Taiwanese and US interests in the region will continue and most likely accelerate.

In the meantime, President Chen Shui-bian's administration can only be grateful to the US Department of Defense for intervening to ensure that this year's Monterey talks will take place. It is crucial, however, that defenders of democracy on both sides of the Pacific take this incident as a sign of things to come, and make a much more committed effort to set up lines of communication.

Though American Institute in Taiwan Director Douglas Paal was savaged in a recent US State Department report for not keeping Washington adequately informed of developments here, what has been genuinely surprising is the amateurish and slovenly attempts by the Chen administration to communicate with Washington, and, just as importantly, members of Congress. It is not clear who should be held responsible: Chen, perhaps, or the increasingly discredited Boy Scouts -- his youthful team of so-called advisers.

Regardless, the truth of the matter is that if there is going to be change, Taiwan cannot afford to be anything less than an instigator of it rather than its dumb object. As the Bush administration struggles with Iraq and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, a more proactive and focused campaign for practical support among members of Congress and other US officials will vindicate supporters in the US and at home at a time of considerable distraction for the American public. There is no clearer road to take.

Legislators a disgrace

By Jenny Hsu

In the past few days, our legislators have successfully solidified our place as the No. 1 International Laughing Stock. We as citizens sincerely appreciate their examples of immaturity, selfishness, violence, stupidity, rudeness, indolence, inability to take responsibility and most importantly, their lack of social etiquette.

As a future mother, I definitely want my children to grow up under a chaotic government through which they will never learn the meaning of sound leadership. I also want to make sure that when I get older, I will have to live alone without any social benefits or security to depend on.

These past two days, our nation's decision-makers did a wonderful job of setting the tone for the rest of the session. The pushing, shoving, water pouring, cup throwing and profanity exchanging are just Taiwan's version of a well-organized government.

I am so delighted that my tax money is spent on keeping these diligent civil servants on their high-salary payrolls. The Legislative Yuan was established to exchange spit wads and acting skills, instead of ideas on how to make our country stronger.

Also, I want to thank the lawmakers for providing us with thrilling entertainment, such as real-life slugging and wrestling (after all, we all know the World Wrestling Federation is nothing but theater).

Beloved legislators, our future is in your hands. Please make sure our national image stays completely tarnished, so our foreign friends can have something laugh about, especially if they ever need material for the next blockbuster comedy. Also, by continuing your nonsense mudslinging, China will be so frightened that it would never even dream of attacking us. After all, why would it want to invade a country full of weak, useless, idiotic clowns?

Jenny Hsu

Taipei

Taiwan, China share little culture

By Chen Ching-chih

Early last month, a legislator asked a group of Taiwanese-American professors how best to address a question posed by some US Congressional aides: Why won't the Taiwanese, who have a shared culture and ethnic origin with the Chinese, simply accept Beijing's claim that Taiwan is part of China?

It is most unfortunate that even Congressional aides have been misinformed and, worse yet, manipulated by China's propaganda machine. Before addressing the question, it is essential that we understand how the argument of "shared culture and shared ethnic origin" has been exploited for political purposes and that we explain that the Chinese and the Taiwanese really share few cultural and ethnic origins.

First of all, not all people who have a shared culture and shared ethnic origin must belong to one nation-state. For example, the British and their descendants over the centuries have founded several colonies that subsequently became independent countries, including the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Likewise, the German-speaking people have established two German-speaking nation-states: Germany and Austria. Arabs most certainly have more than a dozen Arab-speaking countries.

Second, using the pretext of "tung-wen tung-chung," or "same script, same race," the Chinese have repeatedly demanded that the Taiwanese accept China's annexation of Taiwan. Of course, the use of the idea "same script, same race" or any of its equivalents is neither unique nor unusual in modern world history.

In 1910, employing the "same script, same race" argument, Imperial Japan manipulated Korea into accepting the Annexation Treaty and subsequently made it a Japanese colony. Using more or less similar arguments, such as the idea of "Asia for Asians," Japan in 1940 set up its "Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere" to create a bloc of Asian nations, including occupied China, Manchuria and the Russian Maritime Province, under the leadership of Japan to supposedly free Asia from Western colonial rule, as well as to expand Japanese power. Japan was not alone in exploiting the pretext of shared culture and ethnic origin.

Nazi Germany employed the same excuse to forcibly annex Austria in 1938. Fortunately, in all such cases annexation or occupation did not last. In 1945, having defeated Germany and Japan, the Allied forces liberated Korea, China, Austria and others.

Now, let's examine the Chinese use of the term and concept "same script, same race." The Chinese have been indoctrinated to believe in the origin of a single Han Chinese race in the area of the Yellow River. They will thus say that all Han Chinese have descended from the Yellow Emperor of the ancient times. In addition, they also believe that the Han Chinese culture was so splendid that non-Chinese came to China to learn and even stay to be assimilated and absorbed into the Han Chinese Empire.

In The New Chinese Empire published in 2003, Ross Terrill refers to this phenomenon as imperial China's "one China myth." The effect of the Chinese efforts to sustain the myth is such that, "The idea and ideal of one China are deeply embedded in the Chinese mind," as Singapore's Foreign Minister George Yeo said.

In reality, archeological findings and population geneticists' studies have established that the Han Chinese race is a diverse collection of peoples with a variety of origins, traditions and spoken languages. Today, within the Han Chinese population there are at least eight distinct languages spoken. It is evident that it is the Chinese political and cultural tradition, and practice, to compel all peoples within the empire to accept the Han Chinese identity.

Next, let's focus on the case of Taiwan. Until the early 17th century, Taiwan was home to the indigenous people of Austronesian descent. It was only when the Dutch set foot on the island and claimed southwest Taiwan as their colony in 1624 that the Dutch authorities began to recruit immigrants from southeastern China to settle and farm in Taiwan.

After the Manchu Qing Dynasty annexed Taiwan in 1683, the Manchu court forbade immigration. Immigrants from the other side of the Taiwan Strait however continued to arrive illegally on the island. Once the initial Manchu prohibition was lifted in the mid-18th century, even more immigrants landed on the island. In any case, most of the immigrants in Taiwan during the first century of Manchu rule were bachelors, and consequently there was a very high number of unions between male immigrants and Taiwan's indigenous women.

In addition, population geneticists, such as Marie Lin of Taiwan's Mackay Hospital, have confirmed through genetic studies that the immigrants from Qing Empire's southeast coast were close kin of the Vietnamese. The descendants of the intermarriage between the immigrants and the indigenous people are genetically rather different from the Han Chinese, particularly those of North China who are in turn mostly descendants of unions between Han Chinese and non-Han herders and nomads.

After having lost the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石)-led government found itself in exile in Taiwan. The Nationalist Chinese have since claimed that 98 percent of the inhabitants of Taiwan are of Chinese descent while the Aborigines constitute only the remaining 2 percent.

It is evident that such an extremist view of the ethnic composition is clearly a remnant of the Chinese imperial mode of viewing ethnic minorities as having been assimilated or absorbed by the Han Chinese as soon as they had adopted Han names. China's claim of shared ethnic origin between the Taiwanese and the Chinese is consequently weak at best.

As for shared culture, due to its separate historical development from China, particularly after Taiwan was ceded to Imperial Japan as a result of the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki, Taiwanese culture is essentially a mixture of Japanese, Western (particularly American), Aboriginal and Chinese cultures.

In the post-World War II era, Taiwan has been on a course of development, socio-political as well as economic, that is totally different from that taken by China under the rule of Mao Zedong. Economic differences might have lessened after China started on the course of economic reform in 1979. However, socio-political development on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait continues to differ greatly. The difference is particularly striking in the area of political culture. In addition to adapting a Leninist party, the Chinese have strengthened the authoritarian characteristics of the imperial past.

Taiwan, on the other hand, supports and practices a liberal democracy, as a result of lessons learned from the West, particularly the US. Today, rule of law (ie, freedom and justice) prevails in Taiwan while in China it is still essentially rule by men (ie, tyranny). Suffice to say there is little shared culture, except in terms of the Chinese written script, between Taiwan and China.

In addition to utilizing modern technology and methods such as wire-tapping and policing the Internet, Beijing has repeatedly looked back to China's imperial past to falsely legitimize the Chinese Communist Party's continued appropriation of power. There is clearly little shared culture or shared ethnic origins between the forward-looking Taiwanese and the Chinese, who prefer to remain true to their perceived past.

Judging from the fact that the overwhelming majority of the people of Taiwan have rejected Beijing's "one China" principle and its equivalents, such as "one country, two systems," we can be sure that the Taiwanese are determined to be free and determined to maintain Taiwan's status as a sovereign and independent nation.

In short, the answer to the question raised at the top of this essay is: There is no reason for the freedom-loving Taiwanese to agree to China's design to annex Taiwan.

Chen Ching-chih is a researcher with the Los Angeles-based Institute for Taiwanese Studies.