China confirms it will build aircraft carrier: state press
　

AFP , BEIJING
Tuesday, Mar 24, 2009, Page 1

China will develop an aircraft carrier in line with its status as a major global power, state press yesterday reported National Defense Minister Liang Guanglie (梁光烈) as saying.

The comments by Liang, which come shortly after a spike in tension when Chinese vessels confronted a US naval surveillance ship, are the latest high-level confirmation that Beijing is beefing up its military.

Liang told visiting Japanese Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada on Friday of China’s ambition, the reports said.

JAPANESE SOURCES

“Among the big nations, only China does not have an aircraft carrier. China cannot be without an aircraft carrier forever,” the Oriental Morning Post — citing Japanese official sources — quoted Liang as saying.

“China’s navy is currently rather weak,” he said. “We need to develop an aircraft carrier.”

Senior members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have also called in recent months for China to acquire its first aircraft carrier, a sophisticated piece of military hardware that can be used to project power far beyond a nation’s shores.

“Building aircraft carriers is a symbol of an important nation. It is very necessary,” the China Daily paper quoted Admiral Hu Yanlin (胡顏林) as saying earlier this month.

“China has the capability to build aircraft carriers and should do so,” Hu was quoted as saying.

The defense ministry refused to immediately comment on Liang’s remarks, but in December, ministry spokesman Huang Xueping (黃雪平) told reporters that China would “seriously” consider getting an aircraft carrier.

ACADEMICS AGREE

“China needs an aircraft carrier because its global status is rising and it needs to defend its maritime territory and help maintain international peace,” said Jia Qingguo (賈慶國), an international security expert at Peking University.

“Sooner or later China will build an aircraft carrier. When it happens will mainly depend on whether the demand for this intensifies or not,” Jia said.

Liu Jiangyong (劉江永), an expert on international security at Tsinghua University, told the Global Times that a carrier was needed to protect shipping interests in an increasingly interlinked world.

“China has the need and the capability to build an aircraft carrier,” the paper quoted Liu as saying.

“Building an aircraft carrier will raise our strength in the high seas and is a necessary choice for a strong China,” Liu said.

Tibetan affairs head says it’s a bad time for Dalai Lama visit
　

By Loa Iok-sin
STAFF REPORTER
Tuesday, Mar 24, 2009, Page 3

Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission Minister Kao Su-po (高思博) yesterday voiced support for President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) stance that Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama should not visit now.

Kao made the remarks when answering questions from Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Wong Chin-chu (翁金珠) and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chang Ching-chung (張慶忠) about the Association of Taiwan Journalists’ invitation to the Dalai Lama and his recent statements that he would like to visit Taiwan again.

“The Dalai Lama’s visit is a highly sensitive issue, and we [the government] think the timing is not appropriate at the moment after our assessments,” Kao said. “We have to consider how other countries would react to [the Dalai Lama’s visit to Taiwan] and make the best judgment for Taiwan’s national interests.”

“As an old friend, I think the Dalai Lama would understand the difficulties we’re facing now,” he said.

Kao added that the Dalai Lama once rejected Taiwan’s invitation to visit in 2002, when the Tibetan government-in-exile was holding talks with Beijing.

Kao’s comments echoed Ma’s words at a press conference in December, despite the fact that earlier last year, Ma said that he would welcome the spiritual leader’s visit following his inauguration in May.

The exiled government’s representative, Dawa Tsering, said that the commission had nothing to do with the Dalai Lama’s visit.

“Whether the Dalai Lama would visit Taiwan has nothing to do with the commission, and the Dalai Lama will not be in touch with them through any means at all,” he told the Taipei Times. “Besides, although the Dalai Lama expressed his wish to visit Taiwan, he has no concrete plan at the moment.”

It’s a policy of the exiled Tibetan government to stay out of contact with the commission as it considers both Tibetans and Mongolians to be part of the Republic of China.

Taiwan Friends of Tibet chairwoman Chow Mei-li (周美里), meanwhile, panned the government for the remark.

“Many individuals and organizations around the country have expressed their wish to invite the Dalai Lama to Taiwan. A democratically elected government should not only listen to what other countries — notably China — have to say about what we do, it should listen to what the majority of its own people have to say,” Chow said.

Balancing freedom and prejudice
　

By Tao Yi-Feng 陶儀芬
Tuesday, Mar 24, 2009, Page 8

I wonder what would happen if a Japanese official were to talk about “high-class Japanese.” Imagine how offended people in other Asian countries would be.

What if a US government official were exposed by members of Congress as having, over months and years, used a pseudonym to post on the Internet articles full of racial prejudice? Think what an uproar that would cause.

Of course communities that felt insulted would react angrily. It would be quite reasonable for them to call on the government to condemn such prejudice. That is the point. Freedom of speech has its limits. Public indignation and government denunciation of inflammatory language should not be equated with “state repression” or “McCarthyism.”

All people are born equal and should respect one another — these are fundamental values that no culture, political power or ideology today can deny. However, where there are differences, there will be prejudice. French jokes about Germans could fill volumes. New Yorkers look down on people from New Jersey. Shanghainese are disliked by people from all other parts of China.

The faster a society is changing and the more complex and plural it is, the more likely prejudice is to appear. People use prejudice to console themselves when they have trouble adapting to change. Prejudice is the voice of those who feel helpless in the face of overwhelming social forces.

It is no surprise, then, that Taiwan — a society of migrants — should be replete with all kinds of prejudice dividing people along the lines of “us and them.” Terms like “savages,” “Taiwan slackers,” “mainlander pigs” and “Chinese chicks” are witness to the narrow-minded attitudes among us. That those who are targeted by such taunts are able to redefine them with new cultural connotations is, on the other hand, an expression of Taiwanese society’s tolerance and sense of humor.

Why, then, are people making such a fuss about the nasty things diplomat Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英), or the pseudonymous Fan Lan-chin (范蘭欽), has written over the years in blog posts about Taiwan and those who advocate independence?

If the author were just any man or woman on the street, there would be little cause for complaint. More prejudiced and more hate-filled postings than these abound, be they from those in favor of or opposed to independence for Taiwan. It is a necessary evil in a democratic and pluralistic society that allows freedom of expression, since it allows people holding all kinds of opinions to see the blind spots in their arguments. No matter which party is in power, the government need not and should not interfere in such activities.

Kuo, however, is a high-ranking civil servant. His case raises two questions on which the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) must take a solemn stand. First, civil servants must be loyal to their country, and they must treat all their compatriots equally and without discrimination. If they fail to do so, then one must ask whether they are fit to serve. That is why the Government Information Office transferred Kuo to another post, told him to make a public apology and handed the case over to the Commission on the Disciplinary Sanctions of Functionaries (公懲會) for further investigation.

Second, in a civilized society, a political force that has or may gain control over state organs must uphold the basic values of equality and mutual respect between different social groups. That is why those groups that feel insulted are calling on the Ma government to clearly dissociate itself from prejudice and the politics of hate. If the government fails to take such a stand, it will be unable to allay suspicions that it is willing to tolerate the likes of Fan Lan-chin.

During the eight years in which the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) occupied the presidency, society called on the DPP’s leaders to firmly distance itself from pro-DPP politicians and officials like Lin Chung-mo (林重謨) and Tsai Chi-fang (蔡啟芳) when they used offensive language, and from grass-roots DPP supporters who held placards reading “Chinese pigs” at street demonstrations.

When Chuang Kuo-jung (莊國榮), secretary-general of the Ministry of Education under the DPP administration, used misogynist language and publicly insulted Ma Ying-jeou’s father while speaking off duty at an election meeting, no one in the DPP sought to cover up his shortcomings. The DPP denounced Chuang in no uncertain terms and he resigned from his post that very evening.

Still, the DPP paid a heavy price for Chuang’s irresponsible pronouncements in last year’s presidential election, because a civilized society is wary of letting prejudice and hate creep into the state apparatus.

A democratic society must protect citizens’ freedom of expression — even the freedom to express their prejudices. At the same time, however, it must prevent prejudice from seeping into the machinery of government. That is why since World War II, democratic countries — regardless of whether a liberal or conservative party is in power — do not tolerate officials using hate speech. If any official should do so, the government will be expected to denounce the official concerned and remove him or her from office.

Today in Taiwan the public has the same expectations of the ruling Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), just as it had of the DPP when it was in power. Intolerance for prejudice in the corridors of power is not a mark of totalitarianism — on the contrary, it is a rejection of it.

Tao Yi-feng is an associate professor of political science at National Taiwan University.