US lawmakers warn EU on lifting China arms ban
　

By Charles Snyder
STAFF REPORTER, WASHINGTON
Saturday, May 03, 2008, Page 1

The US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee has approved a measure calling on US President George W. Bush’s administration to take strong actions, including sanctions on European firms if needed, to try to prevent the EU from lifting its embargo on the sale of arms to China.

There is growing concern in Washington that the EU might make another attempt to lift the embargo this year.

The measure is part of a broader bill the committee sent to the full House on Wednesday that would tighten up on controls on the licensing of arms exports, and deal with a range of other international proliferation matters such as North Korea’s provision of nuclear material to Syria.

The bill, which notes the danger that arms sold to China could be used against Taiwan, was introduced on Tuesday by the chairman of the committee, Representative Howard Berman.

It was quickly cosponsored by the ranking Republican, Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and two other members.

The action comes two months before French President Nicholas Sarkozy assumes the six-month presidency of the EU in July.

France has long rallied for the US to abandon its arms embargo, which was imposed in the wake of the Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing in 1989, and Sarkozy renewed that call last November during a visit to Beijing in which he signed US$30 billion worth of commercial contracts, mainly for the Chinese purchase of Airbus aircraft.

The bill declares that it is the policy of the US government “to oppose any diminution or termination of the arms embargo ... and take whatever diplomatic and other measures that are appropriate to convince the member states of the European Union, individually and collectively, to continue to observe this embargo in principle and in practice.”

“Appropriate measures should include the prohibitions on entering into defense procurement contracts or defense-related research and development arrangements with European Union member states that do not observe such an embargo in practice,” it says.

Whether the arms embargo section of the bill will survive a full House vote is unclear.

In July 2005, when there was a concerted movement in the EU to lift the embargo, spearheaded by Sarkozy’s predecessor, Jacques Chirac, and then German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, a similar bill, including such sanctions on EU firms, failed in the House.

However, that bill contained a tough detailed list of sanctions against European countries and firms, unlike the more general current bill, and was voted on at a time when the Republicans controlled Congress, unlike today’s Democratic control.

The 2005 bill, which appeared ready to be adopted, was torpedoed when lobbyists from US defense and aerospace firms, including Boeing, besieged representatives on the floor just before the vote, convincing some 100 of them, according to one count at the time, to switch their votes to “nay.”

The US firms were concerned that if the bill passed, their own business in Europe would be hurt by a backlash by the EU governments.

Earlier in 2005, the House and Senate did pass milder measures expressing “strong concerns” over the possible lifting of the embargo, and strong opposition by the Bush administration to wider arms sales to China — including exhortations by Bush during a visit to Europe that year — convinced the EU to continue the embargo.

The house bill this week notes that after the EU decided to retain the arms sales restrictions, the US and the EU decided to begin a strategic dialogue on China and the security situation in East Asia, and the lawmakers expressed the hope that the dialogue will assure that the European nations “understood the gravity of prematurely lifting the embargo.”

The committee also said it hoped “a more intensive dialogue with Europe on this matter will clarify for the United States’ friends and allies in Europe how their non-lethal arms transfers improve the force projection of the People’s Republic of China, are far from benign and enhance the prospects for the threat or use of force in resolving the status of Taiwan.”

The dialogue, the bill says, could also foster a greater understanding of “the consequences of European assistance to the military buildup of the People’s Republic of China for peace and stability in that region, to the security interests of the United States and its friends and allies in the region, and, in particular, to the safety of the United States armed forces” in the region.

The bill also requires the president to submit reports to Congress every six months on administration efforts and activities in its efforts to keep the embargo in force.

Defense ministry unruffled by China sub base report
　

By Jimmy Chuang
STAFF REPORTER
Saturday, May 03, 2008, Page 1

The Ministry of National Defense reacted quietly yesterday to a news report that the Chinese navy had built a nuclear submarine base in Hainan Province, saying it already knew about the base.

“We knew about it six months ago,” ministry spokeswoman Colonel Lisa Chi (池玉蘭) said by telephone yesterday afternoon.

Agence France-Presse reported yesterday that China has built a major underground nuclear submarine base on the southern tip of Hainan. The wire agency quoted the UK’s Daily Telegraph, as saying that Jane’s Intelligence Review had obtained satellite images of the base, the first confirmation of the base’s existence.

The base was said to be able to house a score of nuclear ballistic missile submarines and a host of aircraft carriers.

The Telegraph, which published multiple satellite photos, said one image showed a Chinese 094 nuclear submarine at the base.

Other images show several warships moored on long jetties as well as numerous entrances to what appear to be a network of tunnels. There are reportedly 11 tunnel openings carved into the hillside at the base, with each entrance stretching to a height of about 18m.

Chi said that the ministry had no plans to change its defense policies or implement stricter security mechanisms because of the Hainan base.

“We are fully aware of the Chinese military’s latest developments and shall react accordingly when necessary,” she said.

US senator accuses China of turning hotels into spies

AP, WASHINGTON
Saturday, May 03, 2008, Page 1

A US senator accused the Chinese government on Thursday of ordering US-owned hotels in China to install Internet filters that can spy on international visitors coming to see the Olympic Games.

Republican Senator Sam Brownback made the charge at a news conference where he and other lawmakers denounced China’s record of human-rights abuses and urged US President George W. Bush not to attend the opening ceremonies in Beijing.

“This is wrong, it’s against international conventions, it’s certainly against the Olympic spirit,” Brownback said. “The Chinese government should remove that request and that order.”

Brownback said he had seen the language of memos received by at least two US-owned hotels. He declined to name them, and said he obtained the information from two “reliable but confidential sources” in the hope that public pressure would persuade the Chinese government to back off the demand.

The senator called China “the foremost enabler of human-rights abuses around the world” and said the Chinese government is turning the summer games into “an Olympics of oppression.”

A telephone call to the Chinese embassy for reaction on Thursday was not immediately returned.

Other lawmakers at the news conference condemned Beijing for supporting repressive governments in Sudan and Myanmar, suppressing dissent in Tibet and forcibly returning North Korean refugees who flee across the border.

Media head defends Taiwan rights
　

INFORMATION ACCESS: Head of the UN Correspondents Association J. Tuyet Nguyen called on UN chief Ban Ki-moon to stop excluding Taiwanese media representatives

STAFF WRITER, WITH CNA
Saturday, May 03, 2008, Page 2

The head of the New-York based UN Correspondents Association spoke on Thursday in defense of the right of Taiwanese journalists to enjoy access to the UN and its affiliated agencies and bodies.

Speaking at a conference marking 2008 World Press Freedom Day at the UN headquarters, association president J. Tuyet Nguyen said that while the UN continues to state the importance of and the need for freedom of expression, access and empowerment, there are still news workers who are excluded from access to the UN and its affiliated agencies and bodies.

Nguyen said that the Geneva-based Association of Correspondents Accredited to the UN passed a resolution in March asking UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to reconsider the policy of excluding media representatives who hold Taiwanese passports from covering the UN.

DISCRIMINATION

Nguyen said that while Switzerland and the US — where the UN headquarters and affiliated agencies and bodies are located — grant visas to Taiwanese journalists and camera crews, the UN nevertheless discriminates against them.

He added that the US Overseas Press Club and other international journalist groups had written Ban asking the UN to face the issue involving reporters’ rights to fair and transparent news coverage.

Noting that freedom of expression is a fundamental human right as stated in Article 19 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Nguyen said all news workers should be allowed access to direct news coverage.

Ban, in his speech to the conference, also quoted Article 19, which stipulates that people have the freedom of expression and freedom of seeking, accepting and disseminating news and ideas through access to media bodies.

RAISING AWARENESS

World Press Freedom Day is a day designated by the UN to raise awareness of the importance of freedom of the press and to remind governments of their duty to respect and uphold the right to freedom of expression.

Proclaimed by the UN General Assembly in 1993, the day is celebrated on May 3, the anniversary of the Declaration of Windhoek, a statement of free press principles put together by African newspaper journalists in 1991.

Kissinger: PRC apologist to the end

Saturday, May 03, 2008, Page 8

Diplomats speak a strange, sometimes amoral language as part of their trade, yet even allowing for this, former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger’s mini-essay on Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) in Time magazine this week was wholly objectionable. It also illuminated a mindset that continues to dominate the US State Department, to the cost of both the US and Taiwan.

Personal praise of Hu aside, Kissinger only turned to the key issue late in the piece, arguing that while the US president is “obliged to articulate the deepest values of our people, including human rights ... Any Chinese President needs to reflect the necessities of his society, including the territorial integrity of a united China.”

In two simple sentences, readers could appreciate the stark distinction that exists in the conception of statehood for the most powerful country in the world and the pretender to that throne.

In the US, the people are the source of power and the creators of values. In China, the people are voiceless and defined by what they “need” rather than what they aspire to. And of all the things they need, apparently, “territorial integrity” is the thing that China privileges above all else, regardless of the opinions of its subjects or the fact that China is under no external territorial threat.

Regrettably, there is a sense that Kissinger approves of this philosophical state of affairs, or at least considers the autocratic Chinese mindset to be reasonable and natural.

What Kissinger does not say, but knows all too well, is that Chinese expansionism and patriotism are indistinguishable as far as the Chinese Communist Party is concerned, and Hu, the man of the hour, is its chief protagonist.

Instead, Kissinger prefers to indulge in pseudo-sociological claptrap, arguing that Hu is “not a crusader,” whatever that means, and has “proclaimed the goal of a harmonious society whose components work together by consensus rather than direction.”

Putting aside Hu’s “harmonious” butchery in Tibet when he was in charge there in the late 1980s, the obvious question emerges: How does Kissinger distinguish between “consensus” and “direction” when the former has been in the service of the latter in China for thousands of years? Chinese societies, regardless of their political structure, continue to prefer the appearance of consensus to the potentially beneficial public expression of division, and the biggest Chinese society of all continues to justify awful repression in the name of this “consensus.” (Kissinger’s suggestion that Hu’s approach to governance is a “marked evolution from Mao Zedong (毛澤東)” is also facile. Mao was a mass murderer and an egomaniac; every Chinese leader since has represented a “marked evolution” of some sort.)

The so-called “1992 consensus” between Taiwan and China on how to interpret the meaning of “one China” is a beautiful example of the Chinese autocrat trumping the historical record in the name of “consensus.” There was no such agreement, but that no longer matters, because top officials in China, Taiwan and the US now claim it is real.

For China and for some in Taiwan and the US, it is preferable to proceed on the basis of a fictional agreement than on the cold reality of conflict. But as Kissinger might acknowledge, given his lamentable record of backing criminal regimes around the world, sowing lies has its eventual dreadful harvest.

Tibet: proof enough of the Chinese rights abyss
　

By Chen Lung-chu 陳隆志
Saturday, May 03, 2008, Page 8

Today is World Press Freedom Day. The UN General Assembly passed a resolution designating this day as such in 1993.

Its main purpose is to stress the importance of freedom of the press and protection of journalists. These are fundamental conditions for any country that wants to develop democratic politics, initiate political reform and promote prosperity.

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

BASIC HUMAN RIGHT

Thus, press freedom is a basic human right. Building an independent and autonomous media environment and protecting freedom of opinion and expression are both symbols of an advanced and modern country.

Today, through its tight monitoring and control of newspapers, television, radio stations and even the Internet, China has comprehensive restrictions on its people and prevents them freely circulating ideas relating to human rights, democracy and freedom.

It also minimizes their opportunities to express their own opinions.

Now, with the 2008 Beijing Olympics, China is attempting to improve its image in the areas of human rights and press freedom.

PROMISES

On the one hand, Beijing promised the international community that it would ensure freedom of the press and agreed to loosen restrictions on travel for foreign journalists.

On the other, it has been expanding the monitoring and control of media outlets and journalists, and has strengthened the suppression and persecution of political dissidents and human rights activists.

In March, China attracted considerable international attention by cracking down on peaceful demonstrations by Tibetans.

The result was violent persecution.

Then, using regional stability as an excuse, China expelled foreign journalists from Tibet in an attempt to block news about the government’s suppression of the local population.

Official Chinese media outlets then distorted the facts and defamed Tibetan people while covering up how soldiers and police arrested, imprisoned and killed local residents.

MESSAGE

The authorities will now wait until the situation stabilizes before choosing a more appropriate time to reopen Tibet to Western journalists so that they can spread the message at home and abroad that Tibet is calm.

But if its crackdown was reasonable, legitimate and legal, then why did it have to expel foreign journalists in the first place?

Such a pointed blockade of news and banishment of foreign journalists highlights the nature of the Chinese government, which openly deprives the press of its freedoms so that it can maintain control of media content.

The bloody crackdown in Tibet and the corresponding crackdown on press freedom in the run-up to the Beijing Olympics have deepened the international community’s impression of China as an authoritarian regime opposed to democracy and human rights.

This behavior violates the Olympic ideal of promoting peace and respect for human rights through sports.

Chen Lung-chu is the chairman of the Taiwan New Century Foundation.