US lawmakers urge Bush not to forget Taiwan
　

By William Lowther
STAFF REPORTER , WASHINGTON
Thursday, Dec 25, 2008, Page 1

“The latest events appear to signal a disturbing erosion of civil liberties and human rights in Taiwan.”— from a letter signed by 14 members of the US Congress

Fourteen members of the US Congress have written to US President George W. Bush urging him not to forget Taiwan during his final days in office.

They want Bush to warn President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) that he must respect Taiwan’s basic freedoms and civil rights as he tries to improve relations with China.

“We want to express our concern about recent developments in Taiwan,” the letter written by Republican Representative Scott Garrett said. “The latest events appear to signal a disturbing erosion of civil liberties and human rights in Taiwan.”

The letter charges that during Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin’s (陳雲林) visit last month, police seized Republic of China flags from anyone waving them along routes traveled by Chen; people were forbidden to display Tibetan flags; a shop was closed because it played Taiwanese folk music and police mistreated those who opposed the visit.

The letter says that several Democratic Progressive Party members had been interrogated, arrested and detained by police for politically motivated reasons.

“With this in mind, we hope that you will keep a close eye on these developments and urge the Ma Yin-jeou [sic] government to respect the basic freedoms and civil rights that Taiwan’s people have fought so diligently to achieve,” the letter said.

The letter was also signed by Republicans John Culberson, Dana Rohrabacher, Thaddeus McCotter, Kenny Marchant, Trent Franks, John Duncan, Michele Bachmann, Sue Myriuck, John Sullivan and Peter Roskam, and Democrats Robert Andrews, Dennis Moore and Rush Holt.

It is unlikely at this late stage of his administration that Bush will take any direct action. However, the letter will certainly be noted by president-elect Barack Obama’s administration and those officials he is appointing to foreign policy positions concerned with Taiwan.

There is concern that the Obama administration will be so anxious to promote good relations with China that it might overlook civil and human rights violations in Taiwan.

“Letters of this kind are very important because they act as a reminder that it is wrong to sacrifice civil rights for political policies — the end does not justify the means,” an Amnesty International official said.

Bob Yang (楊英育), president of the US-based Formosan Association for Public Affairs, said: “Sending this letter demonstrates the US Congress’ serious commitment to Taiwan’s democracy and freedom. We urge the Ma administration to heed international concern and to pledge to uphold the highest standard of universal human rights and civil liberty in Taiwan.”

Beijing signals more interest in building carriers

NY TIMES NEWS SERVICE, BEIJING
Thursday, Dec 25, 2008, Page 1

In the clearest indication yet that China could soon begin building its first aircraft carrier, a Defense Ministry spokesman said on Tuesday that the country was seriously considering “relevant issues” in making its decision about whether to move ahead with the project, Xinhua news agency said.

The spokesman, Huang Xueping (黃雪平), said at a news conference in Beijing that aircraft carriers were “a reflection of a nation’s comprehensive power,” indicating that Chinese government officials saw value in adding a carrier to the country’s fleet. Huang said that China would use any aircraft carrier built in the future to safeguard its shores and defend “sovereignty over coastal areas and territorial seas,” Xinhua reported.

If China does decide to build the carrier, it will no doubt increase tensions with the US, Taiwan and Japan, among other governments. China has been expanding its navy at a fast pace. The government has built at least 60 warships since 2000, and its fleet of 860 vessels includes about 60 submarines.

Last month, a senior Chinese military official hinted in an interview with the Financial Times that China would like to build an aircraft carrier. Major General Quan Lihua (關力華) said having a carrier was the dream of any great military power and suggested that the US had nothing to fear if China did build a carrier.

The US has 11 aircraft carriers, but only a handful of other nations — including Britain, France, Italy and Russia —- have carriers, and of those, none has more than a few.

The Ministry of National Defense had called the news conference on Tuesday to give details about the deployment of Chinese naval ships off the coast of Somalia, where an increase in piracy has made the shipping lanes the most dangerous in the world. Three Chinese ships are scheduled to head to the area today.

The buildup of the Chinese military could change the balance of power across the Taiwan Strait.

DPP slams KMT Conduct Act
　

CALL THE COPS: Verbal clashes broke out as the Chinese Nationalist Party used its majority to push through an amendment that allows the speaker to call in police
　

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Dec 25, 2008, Page 3

Amid verbal clashes, a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-controlled legislative committee yesterday steamrollered legal revisions to a law that empowers the legislative speaker and committee conveners to settle disputes by calling in police.

Cross-party negotiations must be held before the legal revision proceeds to the legislative session for further deliberation.

Cashing in on its numerical advantage, the five-member Judiciary, Organic Laws and Statutes Committee yesterday voted three to one in favor of an amended version endorsed by six KMT legislators, including Hsieh Kuo-liang (謝國樑), who chaired the meeting.

The vote was proposed by KMT Legislator Alex Fai (費鴻泰), after he traded insults with Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator William Lai (賴清德), with each calling the other “wicked.”

KMT and DPP members held a heated debate over the necessity of amending the Legislators’ Conduct Act (立法委員行為法) during the three-hour meeting.

KMT Legislator Pan Wei-kang (潘維剛) said that it was the norm in democracies for the legislative speaker or committee chairperson to maintain order in the legislature with the help of the security forces.

Pan said that the amendment was proposed because the DPP had adopted dramatic measures, even resorting to violence, to boycott amendments to the Organic Law of the National Communications Commission (國家通訊傳播委員會組織法) last year.

KMT Legislator Chu Fong-chi (朱鳳芝) said that rational debate about controversial issues was the fundamental spirit of democratic politics and the minority should yield to the majority.

“But the DPP is not a democratic or a progressive party,” Chu said. “They are against bills that run counter to their interests and use dramatic measures to boycott them. We cannot simply sit idly by.”

Whether the legislative speaker or committee convener calls in police to maintain order is one thing, she said, but they must be furnished with such power.

Hsieh said the new legislature seems to be less boisterous, but it is not because the DPP does not want to fight, but because it has less people to fight with.

In the 113-member legislature, the KMT holds 81 seats, while the DPP holds just 27.

Lai, however, expressed opposition to the amendment, lamenting the regression of democracy six months into President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) term.

“Are we becoming like China, which is authoritarian and rules by martial law?” he asked.

Lai said he was against the revisions because legislators must be held responsible for their own words and actions and if they were not, they would pay the price in the next election.

“The KMT already has a majority in the legislature; what else do you want?” Lai said. “When you leave no room for the opposition, protest is the only way to get our voices heard.”

Lai criticized the KMT for amending the law to fulfill its own needs and that he would like to see the committee postpone the debate. Lai said he did not think police would want to get involved in conflicts at the legislature.

DPP Legislator Su Chen-ching (蘇震清) agreed, saying that he doubted how effective police would be when confrontation occurred.

DPP Legislator Kuan Bi-ling (管碧玲) said that the DPP only boycotted bills that were unconstitutional or against the national interest and that the KMT already had an enormous amount of power to direct the legislative agenda.

“What are you afraid of?” Kuan asked of the KMT.

Media criticized for Chen allegations, harassing daughter
　

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Dec 25, 2008, Page 3

The office of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) yesterday lodged a protest against a magazine that it said was continuing to publish defamatory and groundless allegations about the former first family and urged media watchdogs to put a stop to irresponsible practices.

The office issued a statement dismissing the stories about the former first family published in the latest edition of Next Magazine, which went on sale yesterday. One of the reports claimed that Chen’s son, Chen Chih-chung (陳致中), had called his father an “idiot” for being superstitious and visiting fortune tellers.

The statement dismissed the reports as “fictitious.” It said over the past few months, the magazine had made groundless and derogatory allegations against the former president and his family on a weekly basis.

“We strongly protest and regret such practices, which trample on the fundamental human rights of others and are done purely for commercial gain,” the statement said.

The statement panned the media for hounding the former president’s daughter, Chen Hsing-yu (陳幸妤), who was almost involved in a traffic accident yesterday while she was attempting to get away from paparazzi who were following her to work.

Chen Hsing-yu is no longer under the protection of a security detail since the former president finished his term, the statement said, and some members of the media have been following her and interrupting her daily activities.

The statement urged the media to stop such “abnormal practices” and leave Chen Hsing-yu alone.

“Please give her some peace and quiet, so that no more conflicts or potential accidents can happen,” the statement said.

The office also called on media associations to pay attention to these “serious matters” and criticized the media for invading the privacy of members of the former president’s family under the pretext of press freedom.

“Please don’t let the media attack, smear or harass the family of the former president simply because they are for A-bian [Chen’s nickname] or against A-bian,” the statement said.

The CCP’s mounting challenges
　

By Sushil Seth
Thursday, Dec 25, 2008, Page 8

Why is President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration so keen to link Taiwan’s fortunes to China’s regime when there are signs that its political health is not as robust as some believe?

Take, for instance, Chinese President Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) recent pep talk to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in which he said that the challenges they faced were so serious that it would test their ability to govern.

The most serious threat is from a slowing economy that will struggle to provide jobs to the country’s unemployed. This is already creating serious urban unrest, on top of widespread dissatisfaction in the rural sector.

What this means is that it will become increasingly difficult for the government to bribe the urban sector at the cost of rural people because there will not be enough to go around.

Having jettisoned ideology, the CCP’s legitimacy comes from economic growth. The party was hoping that it might be able to dole out benefits to the countryside to narrow the divide between it and the urban sector.

On average, urban incomes are said to be three times higher than those of rural areas, though the gap is much wider in remote regions. But with the economy slowing, keeping the urban sector happy poses a serious challenge.

Hu’s slogan of a “harmonious society” is serious business, but it is not progressing at all. If anything, disharmony is growing.

It is becoming difficult to control sources of information, even with Internet firewalls and cyber police. There are too many bloggers doing their own thing, and there are devices and software to circumvent official curbs.

One of the ways the CCP propaganda department is responding to this is to use official publications and news sources such as Xinhua news agency to be more open about bad news.

It is not because they have suddenly become liberal. It is because in this way they can set the limits for the rest of the media outlets that have been widely reporting China’s ills.

The same approach has been evident in the response to natural disasters. The Sichuan earthquake is an example. Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) and Hu won kudos for their humanitarian response to a terrible tragedy.

But when people wanted to publicly and noisily follow up their demands for compensation with investigations into the shoddy construction of local schools destroyed in the quake, the authorities shut them up.

Despite some official openness, there is no concerted effort to institutionalize public avenues for dealing with and redressing public grievances or tackling serious social inequity and injustice.

Since the regime doesn’t allow open channels of public protests, they tend to erupt spontaneously and haphazardly. Of late, these protests have become more frequent and widespread — not a good omen for the regime.

The CCP, of course, is opposed to democratization. There is demand in some quarters, though, for greater debate in the party. In this context the role of the journal Yanhuang Chunqiu (炎黃春秋) and its 85-year-old editor Du Daozheng (杜導正) are creating problems.

Du is pushing for political openness in the party along the lines of ousted party general secretaries Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽) and Hu Yaobang (胡耀邦). Zhao advocated dialogue with students before the military crackdown in Tiananmen Square in June 1989.

In this way, Du and his magazine are not only promoting liberalization within the party but also seeking the rehabilitation of Zhao and Hu Yaobang.

But this is not popular with top leaders, particularly former president Jiang Zemin (江澤民), who retains considerable influence.

Du is under pressure to resign. Instead, he has published an essay by Hu Qili (胡啟立), who in 1989 sided with Zhao in the politburo standing committee against a military crackdown.

Hu Qili wrote: “People were encouraged [before the military crackdown in 1989 when Zhao was party secretary] to speak freely, or even confront each other face-to-face. ... This hasn’t yet become institutionalized. It is worthy of earnest study.”

Hu Qili’s essay is an earnest plea for more open debate in the party’s higher echelons. Even more importantly, it seeks to legitimize Zhao and his line, and might even be read as criticizing Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平).

Hu Qili is not the only one seeking intra-party open debate.

But that is as far as it goes. The idea is not to democratize China but to open up the party a little so that it can exercise its monopoly more effectively.

Party apparatchiks are so used to bludgeoning people that they are not interested in such talk. For example, authorities in one city took to abducting people who complain to higher officials — and then put them in asylums.

More of this might become the norm as social unrest grows.

Sushil Seth is a writer based in Australia.

Watching and waiting for signs of leadership
　

By HoonTing 雲程
Thursday, Dec 25, 2008, Page 8

If we look at postwar Taiwan from the perspective of French historian Fernand Braudel, a leader of the Annales School, we can divine changes in the Taiwanese government’s administrative values — from security to economy, democracy and human rights — under former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).

Developments in national security, the economy, democracy and human rights over the past 63 years can be summed up using the phrase “protection of Taiwan” to describe the government’s stance in the postwar era.

SURVIVAL

From an administrative perspective, survival is the priority of any organization, and if that premise is abandoned, the organization will cease to exist.

In other words, Taiwan will perish if the authorities do not protect it; protecting Taiwan thus becomes a basic and non-negotiable standard.

Because administration is the result of efforts by the general public, it cannot be monopolized by a single authority or person.

Every government has stood on the shoulder of its predecessor without destroying the fruits of the labors of that predecessor.

Thus, in Taiwan’s development, the younger Chiang was able to boost the economy thanks to the security structures built by his father; Lee was able to promote democracy thanks to the younger Chiang’s efforts; and Chen was able to promote human rights thanks to Lee’s efforts.

In accordance with the domestic and international environment at the time, the governments of postwar Taiwan gradually reached a tacit agreement to protect the country that crossed party and ethnic lines.

But after coming to power, has President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government taken stock of the domestic and international environment and planned for and unveiled its values of governance?

Ma’s inaugural speech, entitled “Taiwan’s Renaissance,” and his pledges to rebuild Taiwan, safeguard the Constitution and improve the political atmosphere were either too vague or too general, not to mention that the “common Chinese heritage” of Taiwan and China that he emphasized can hardly be called a universal value.

OVERLY OPTIMISTIC

In Ma’s speeches, only the values of “peace” and “opening” can be thought of as administrative. Unfortunately, his actions since then imply that he is overly optimistic about peace even as he ignores the logic of geopolitics.

In contrast to his policy of opening up to China, he has adopted a contractionary policy domestically. Within a very short time, Taiwan’s security, economy, democracy and human rights have gone into reverse gear, resulting in serious concern in the international community.

Take, for example, Ma’s hesitation over whether Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) should address him as “President,” “Mister” or even nin (您), the polite Chinese form of “you,” during their meeting.

Such hesitation reveals both a wish to curry favor and a wish to quickly push his policies through.

What are Ma’s administrative values?

Has he really thought about them and does he want to implement them?

The Taiwanese public and the international community are still watching, and waiting.

HoonTing is a Taiwan-based freelance writer.