China planning rail link to Taiwan
　

BRIDGING THE GAP: A Mainland Affairs Council official questioned the need for a Beijing-Taipei rail link in light of existing efforts to improve cross-strait transportation
　

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER, WITH AFP , BEIJING
Friday, Mar 13, 2009, Page 1

Taiwanese officials responded with caution yesterday to a Chinese official’s announcement of a plan to build a rail link between Beijing and Taipei.

Responding to a Xinhua report yesterday in which Chinese Minister of Railways Liu Zhijun (劉志軍) was quoted as saying that Beijing was “actively planning” the rail link, Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) said China would have to take professional and political aspects into consideration.

Wang declined to comment further.

“The railway network is expected to lay a foundation of transport infrastructure for the cross-strait economic zone,” Xinhua quoted Liu as saying.

The rail line may stretch across the body of water between Xiamen, a city in the southeastern Chinese province of Fujian, and Taiwan, the news agency said. It did not specify how trains would cross the 180km Taiwan Strait.

At a separate setting yesterday, Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Liu Te-shun (劉德勳) cast doubt on the need for a cross-strait railroad, saying that both sides of the Strait were making efforts to improve transportation links, including sea, air and postal links.

Regular flights will also be on the agenda at the third session of high-level cross-strait talks scheduled for sometime in the next few months, he said, adding that cross-strait transportation links already had a “solid foundation.”

As China has previously proposed building a freeway to Taiwan, Liu Te-shun said it was necessary for both sides to “shorten the psychological distance.”

He said it was also debatable whether there was any need for a “cross-strait economic zone.”

What mattered more was building a better investment environment and protecting the interests of Taiwanese businesses based in China, Liu Te-shun said.

When approached for comment, Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Huang Wei-cher (黃偉哲) said he opposed the cross-strait railway idea because it would put Taiwan in an unfavorable strategic position.

The railway plan was also illogical, as focusing on air links between Beijing and Taipei would be a better way of improving cross-strait trade ties, Huang said.

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chang Hsien-yao (張顯耀) said current transportation links between Taiwan and China and the regular cross-strait charter flights the two nations plan to discuss would be sufficient to satisfy the needs of both sides of the Taiwan Strait.

Building a railway between Taipei and Beijing in a bid to boost cross-strait trade ties would be “uneconomic,” he said.

Regarding the Kinmen County Government’s plan to build a bridge from Kinmen to Xiamen, Liu Te-shun said his understanding was that the Council for Economic Planning and Development had decided “in principle not to build it.”

Wang said the Presidential Office respected the council’s decision.

President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) told local residents during his inspection trip to Kinmen on Aug. 24 last year that, although there should not be any technical problem building the proposed Kindeng Bridge (金嶝大橋), he would like them to consider the political implications and effectiveness of building a bridge to China.

China demands that US end coastal surveillance

AP , BEIJING
Friday, Mar 13, 2009, Page 1

China’s defense ministry has demanded that the US Navy end surveillance missions off the country’s southern coast following a weekend confrontation between a US vessel and Chinese ships.

In its first public comment on the Sunday episode, the ministry repeated earlier statements from the foreign ministry that the unarmed US ship was operating illegally inside China’s exclusive economic zone when it was challenged by three Chinese government ships and two Chinese-flagged trawlers.

“The Chinese side’s carrying out of routine enforcement and safeguarding measures within its exclusive economic zone was entirely appropriate and legal,” ministry spokesman Huang Xueping (黃雪平) said in a statement faxed overnight to reporters.

“We demand the United States respect our legal interests and security concerns and take effective measures to prevent a recurrence of such incidents,” Huang said.

Despite the sharp remarks, ­Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi (楊潔箎) and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met in a private meeting on Wednesday in Washington to say the countries agreed on the need to reduce tensions and avoid a repeat of the confrontation. However, neither side yielded in their conflicting versions of events.

The US says that Navy mapping ship USNS Impeccable was operating legally when it was harassed by Chinese boats in international waters about 120km off China’s southern island province of Hainan.

US Defense Department officials say the Impeccable was on a mission to seek out threats such as submarines and was towing a sonar apparatus that scans and listens for subs, mines and torpedoes. With its numerous Chinese military installations, Hainan offers rich hunting for such surveillance.

Of particular interest is the new submarine base near the resort city of Sanya that is home to the Chinese navy’s most sophisticated craft.Also See: US Congress pans China over Tibet
　

Toronto envoy accused of insulting Taiwan
　

PIRATES AND REDNECKS: The head of information at the representative office in Toronto defamed the people of Taiwan under a pen name, a DPP legislator said
　

By Flora Wang
STAFF REPORTER
Friday, Mar 13, 2009, Page 1

Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Kuan Bi-ling (管碧玲) yesterday accused an overseas consulate official of publishing insulting remarks about Taiwanese.

Kuan said Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英), director of the information division at Taiwan’s representative office in Toronto, had written numerous articles in which he defamed Taiwan and insulted Taiwanese people.

The legislator said Kuo, under the pen name Fan Lan-chin (范蘭欽), had used insulting terms in his articles to refer to Taiwanese, such as taibazi (台巴子, meaning “Taiwanese rednecks”) or wokou (倭寇, meaning “Japanese pirates”).

‘RIDICULOUS’

Kuo also made numerous “ridiculous” remarks in his articles, such as saying that “[China] should spend many years suppressing [people in Taiwan] instead of granting any political freedom [to them] once it has taken Taiwan by force,” Kuan said.

She said that Kuo had also claimed that “the imposition of martial law had been a benevolent act of the then government” and that “the Maokong Gondola is problematic because it was sabotaged by Taiwanese independence [activists].”

Kuan said she discovered that Kuo was using “Fan Lan-chin” as a pen name because he had previously submitted a piece in Fan’s name to the Chinese-language China Times for a supplement on Aug. 2, 2006, and also included his real name.

She urged Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) to look into the matter immediately and punish Kuo for publicly vilifying the nation and voicing support for a Chinese military crackdown on Taiwan.

Su was unavailable for comment yesterday, but he confirmed on Wednesday that Kuo was a staffer at the nation’s Toronto office.

INVESTIGATION

The GIO minister promised to launch a GIO investigation into the matter, saying that Kuo might have violated the principle of administrative impartiality if he had in fact written the articles.

GIO Vice Minister Hsu Chiu-huang (許秋煌) told the Taipei Times Kuo said that he and “a group of friends” shared the pen name.

Hsu said that, for now, the GIO would not punish Kuo if it turns out he had written the articles, on the principle of personal freedom of speech.

However, Hsu said the GIO would continue to evaluate Kuo based on his job performance in promoting the nation’s international publicity efforts.

Hsu said he had asked Kuo to speak and act cautiously and told him that his personal life should never get in the way of his official duties.

US Congress pans China over Tibet
　

WELCOME TO WASHINGTON: With Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi in town, the White House and US State Department also voiced concern about Tibet

AFP , WASHINGTON
Friday, Mar 13, 2009, Page 5

The US Congress on Wednesday urged China to end “repression” in Tibet, ignoring Beijing’s warnings just as Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi (楊潔箎) prepared to meet US President Barack Obama.

The House of Representatives voted an overwhelming 422 to 1 to approve the resolution, which marks 50 years since a failed uprising in Tibet and the Dalai Lama’s flight into exile.

Nine House members did not vote.

The resolution urges China to “cease its repression of the Tibetan people, and to lift immediately the harsh policies imposed on Tibetans.”

The resolution came amid heightened tensions between China and the US, after navy vessels from the two countries clashed in the South China Sea.

To ease the simmering spat, Obama on Wednesday invited Yang to the White House — ignoring protocol, which normally sees diplomatic meetings take place between representatives of similar rank.

But in language expected to anger Beijing, the congressional resolution also called on China to resume dialogue with the Dalai Lama and to “find a lasting solution to the Tibetan issue.”

It also saluted India for hosting tens of thousands of Tibetan refugees.

China had warned that US criticism on Tibet would harm ties between the two countries.

Yang was holding talks in Washington on Wednesday and was to meet Obama yesterday.

“I hope the foreign minister, who’s in town today, hears it — it is cultural genocide, systematically destroying the framework of Tibetan society,” said Representative Frank Wolf, a sponsor of the resolution.

The Republican lawmaker sneaked undercover into Tibet in 1997 and said he heard accounts of torture from monks and nuns who had merely expressed support for the Dalai Lama.

During last year’s anniversary of the 1959 uprising, China broke up another round of protests. Rights groups say more than 200 people died and 1,200 remain unaccounted for a year later.

“Where are they? Let’s ask the foreign minister when he goes to the State Department — where are they?” Wolf asked.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a longtime supporter of Tibet, took to the floor of the chamber to seek support for the resolution, which does not threaten any action against China if it does not comply.

“I so had wished decades ago that we wouldn’t be standing here now still pleading the case for the people of Tibet,” Pelosi said.

“It is long past time — 50 years — for Beijing to respect the human rights of every Tibetan and indeed every Chinese,” she said.

The sole ‘no’ vote came from Ron Paul, a maverick libertarian from Texas who last year unsuccessfully sought the Republican presidential nomination. He often rejects such resolutions as inappropriately interventionist.

“I don’t think the United States would like it too much if China postured in a similar way on our affairs, and there is really no benefit to these types of actions for us,” said Rachel Mills, a spokeswoman for Paul.

The White House and State Department on Tuesday also voiced concern about human rights in Tibet and urged dialogue with the Dalai Lama.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, meeting with Yang, said the White House was “absolutely committed” to defending human rights.

Clinton has come under fire from rights groups for not speaking out more loudly on China.

China’s foreign ministry had urged Congress to drop the Tibet bill, saying the measure proposed by “a few anti-China representatives disregards the history and reality of Tibet.”

One sponsor of the resolution, Representative Howard Berman, said “our friends in China” should consider the resolution not as an attack but as a call to re-engage with the Dalai Lama.

“We have deep, deep respect for both peoples” of China and Tibet, Berman said.

“But after eight rounds of fruitless meetings between the Chinese government and representatives of the Dalai Lama, it appears to many of us that China is not serious about achieving a resolution of this difficult issue,” he said.

Activists concerned after Macau passes security law and blocks HK politicians
　

‘VAGUE AND BROAD’: Macau’s new law toughens the punishment for subversion and could stifle freedoms guaranteed when the colony was handed back to China

AFP , MACAU
Friday, Mar 13, 2009, Page 5

It’s best known as a glitzy gambling haven, but Macau is now drawing the unwanted focus of rights groups after it passed a tough new security law and began blocking visitors from Hong Kong.

Macau’s decision to bar a handful of Hong Kong politicians, academics and a photographer has underscored the cultural and political gaps between the two former colonies, which now both belong to China.

On one side sits Hong Kong, home to a vibrant if unfulfilled tradition of democracy. An hour away by ferry is Macau, one of the top gambling destinations in the world.

Squarely between them is an increasingly bitter dispute that has many in Macau telling Hong Kongers to mind their own business.

“We cannot see why the relationship between the two places, which are meant to be like brothers, could have got so bad,” Hong Kong Democratic Party Chairman Albert Ho (何俊仁) said.

Ho, one of the politicians barred from entering Macau in December as he hoped to take part in a protest against the new security legislation, will lead a new delegation of Hong Kong lawmakers trying to get in on Sunday.

Some here wish they would simply stay away.

As Macau’s colorful and most powerful gambling tycoon Stanley Ho (何鴻燊) put it: “Those people were all shit-stirrers.”

Macau’s new law toughens the punishment for crimes such as treason and subversion. Critics say it will stifle the freedoms guaranteed when the colony was handed back to China in 1999.

“[The bill’s] vague and broad provisions could be used to imprison individuals merely for exercising their rights to freedom of expression and association,” Amnesty International Asia Pacific deputy director Roseanne Rife said.

But the measure sailed through the legislature and only a handful of protesters bothered to turn up for a candlelight vigil before it was passed.

Antonio Ng (吳國昌), one of just two pro-democracy legislators in Macau, said the apathy was unsurprising.

“Most people know the government does not need to use this law to carry out any abuses — it already has sufficient means,” Ng said.

But the wider issue of rights gained more attention when an academic traveling to a conference in Macau and a photographer who was accredited to cover a court case were refused entry.

Hong Kong Chief Executive Donald Tsang (曾蔭權) said he had raised the issue of the border blocks last week with his counterpart Edmund Ho (何厚鏵), who insisted officials had acted lawfully.

If the lawmakers are barred on Sunday, some fear the dispute could end up hurting Macau’s business.

Jonathan Galaviz, a gaming analyst with consultancy Globalysis, said it was crucial that the row did not escalate.

“It will be important for political issues that develop in Macau to not pollute any marketing or promotional campaigns that it is currently executing to attract more tourists or foreign investment,” he said.

Harald Bruning, editor of the English-language Macau Post Daily, said that when it comes to politics, Macau and Hong Kong have little in common.

“Politically, Hong Kong and Macau are located on two different planets,” Bruning said. “Sunday’s trip is widely seen here as a political show primarily directed at a Hong Kong audience.”

Ng said the security legislation was only being introduced to smooth the passage of similar legislation in Hong Kong.

Hong Kong scrapped plans for a security law in 2003 after huge public protests, and some believe Sunday’s visit by legislators is meant to warn the Hong Kong government not to try again.

Not a time for a nation of sheep
　

By J. Michael Cole 寇謐將
Friday, Mar 13, 2009, Page 8

Since dialogue between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was initiated following President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) taking office in May, Beijing has made no secret of its ultimate intentions regarding Taiwan. In speech after speech, the Chinese leadership — including President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) on the proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) — has been surprisingly transparent about the fact that cross-strait talks and various agreements are a means to an end, the stepping stones toward the great goal of “reunification.”

It is puzzling, therefore, that the Ma administration would continue to argue that an ECFA and other pacts with China are nonpolitical and will not undermine the sovereignty of the nation. And yet, despite the unequivocal signals from Beijing, this is what the administration keeps harping about, vaunting the economic benefits of closer ties with China and the alleged security benefits attendant to cross-strait dialogue.

It’s as if the KMT were unable to hear what Hu, Wen and others have been saying all along. The writing’s on the wall — it doesn’t even need deciphering.

The CCP, which faces daunting social challenges under normal circumstances and exacerbated ones during times of economic crisis, will resort to nationalism to breathe new life into its legitimacy with the Chinese. Resurrecting pride with massive military parades is part of that strategy. Another spoke is the long-held promise of “reunification” with Taiwan, “the principal item of unfinished territorial business,” as David Lampton writes in his book The Three Faces of Chinese Power.

For the CCP — and by extension the Chinese nation — Taiwan is the last remnant of centuries of humiliation at Western and Japanese hands, the remaining symbol of colonialism standing in the way of true glory. Simply put, it is an issue of face and of bringing the breakaway province back into the motherly fold. Conveniently, in this time of great uncertainty and potential instability, the CCP is able, for the first time since 1949, to tell its domestic audience that the long-awaited “reunification” might be at hand.

It certainly helps that, through tight control of information, China can censor news of opposition in Taiwan to such agreements or to the direction they appear to be taking the country. As a result, not only can the CCP herald a new era in cross-strait dialogue, it can also portray the talks as non-contentious, as between two groups whose objectives are the same and views are homogenous. Beijing can tell its people that all is well on the Taiwan front, that “reunification” is at hand, that they can forget their worries, dissatisfaction with the CCP as the great Chinese nation will soon be one again. Very few topics feed the flames of Chinese nationalism more than the question of Taiwan.

Given the paucity of non-censored information they have access to, or the risks entailed in seeking more credible sources, Chinese can be forgiven for believing the propaganda or for not realizing that Taiwanese do not all look favorably on Ma’s approaches to China.

In fact, as a consequence of its lack of experience with democratic processes, we could perhaps even forgive the CCP for failing to understand how, in a democracy, legitimacy and decision-making are not top-down phenomena, but rather bottom-up ones, and that what the state says is not carved in stone.

Conversely, in democratic Taiwan access to information is such that anyone who wishes to do so can access what the CCP leadership is saying about cross-strait talks and agreements, and its objectives for the future. Not only can the speeches made by CCP cadres regarding “reunification” be heard and read, but it is even possible to keep count of the number of missiles that the Chinese military is aiming at Taiwan — a number that, despite “peace” talks, continues to grow.

For Taiwanese, who have access to all the information in the world, to stand by like sheep while their government plays with fire with agreements that not only lack oversight but whose ultimate objective may be misinterpreted by their Chinese counterparts, defies comprehension.

There is no denying that the current economic situation is taking center stage in people’s lives, that massive job losses and dwindling fortunes are threatening people’s livelihoods. This notwithstanding, Taiwan’s middle class has been dangerously apathetic when it comes to Ma’s experiment with China and the little opposition that has emerged has been largely relegated to academic circles, the elite, which can easily be portrayed as being out of touch with ordinary Taiwanese.

Part of this comes from the KMT’s skilful use of media outlets under its control or influence, which have portrayed talks with China as a panacea while skewering former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) over allegations of fraud. With the same stroke, it has successfully sidelined the Democratic Progressive Party, which has had difficulty getting traction with Taiwanese and has been regularly ignored by the government and the media.

Those who voted for the KMT last March, meanwhile, have not been getting the full picture. Ironically, by limiting themselves to a pan-blue media that preaches to the converted, and unhampered by the voice of a strong, credible opposition, they may be as blind as their Chinese counterparts when it comes to disagreements with Ma’s China policy (in all fairness, pan-green viewers and readers also tend to be myopic in their choice of media).

If the elite is perched too high in its ivory tower, and if the opposition party has been too discredited by allegations of corruption against Chen to mobilize the population and awaken pan-blue voters to the dangers that await around the corner, someone, somewhere, will have to take over and take the fight to the Ma administration.

For if this is allowed to proceed unchecked, Taiwanese could wake up one day and find themselves in a situation where their worries about a sagging economy or falling stocks are nothing more than a minor headache compared with the new challenges they face. The question is: Does this nation seek to react when it might be too late, or will it seek to be proactive and parry the blows as they come?

The Ma administration has displayed worrying signs of incompetence, while within the KMT there are a number of unaccountable individuals with close ties to Beijing whose motives bode ill for the future of Taiwan. This is a dangerous mix that competent CCP members are sure to exploit to the fullest and with total disregard for the views of ordinary Taiwanese.

The time has arrived for the Taiwanese middle class to awaken from its slumber and take the destiny of their country in their own hands. There is no room for rampant defeatism or the sense of powerlessness that seems to have installed itself like cosmic dust on the shoulders of Taiwanese. Real leaders, anger, a fighting spirit — this is what the situation calls for and only Taiwanese can find the means to breach the pan-green, pan-blue divide and get the message across.

J. Michael Cole is a writer based in Taipei.