Pyongyang warns of nuclear conflict amid rising tensions

AP , SEOUL
Monday, Jun 15, 2009, Page 1

North Korea has warned of a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula while vowing to step up its atomic bomb-making program in defiance of new UN sanctions.

The North’s defiance presents a growing diplomatic headache for US President Barack Obama as he prepares for talks tomorrow with his South Korean counterpart on the North’s missile and nuclear programs.

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak told security-related ministers during an unscheduled meeting yesterday to “resolutely and squarely” cope with the North’s latest threat, his office said. Lee is to leave for the US this morning.

A commentary yesterday in the North’s main state-run Rodong Sinmun newspaper, carried by the official Korean Central News Agency, claimed the US has 1,000 nuclear weapons in South Korea. Another commentary published on Saturday in the state-run Tongil Sinbo weekly claimed the US has been deploying a vast amount of nuclear weapons in South Korea and Japan.

North Korea “is completely within the range of US nuclear attack and the Korean peninsula is becoming an area where the chances of a nuclear war are the highest in the world,” the Tongil Sinbo commentary said.

Kim Yong-kyu, a spokesman at the US military command in Seoul, called the latest accusation “baseless,” saying Washington has no nuclear bombs in South Korea. US tactical nuclear weapons were removed from South Korea in 1991 as part of arms reductions following the Cold War.

South Korea’s Unification Ministry issued a statement yesterday demanding the North stop stoking tension, abandon its nuclear weapons and return to dialogue with the South.

Yesterday Yonhap news agency reported South Korea and the US had mobilized spy satellites, reconnaissance aircraft and human intelligence networks to obtain evidence that the North has been running a uranium enrichment program.

Peng Ming-min launches new book, castigates Ma
　

‘THINK CAREFULLY’: The veteran activist lamented what appeared to be a gradual regression of civil liberties since Ma Ying-jeou came into office last year
　

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER
Monday, Jun 15, 2009, Page 3
　

On Sept. 20, 1964, Peng Ming-min (彭明敏) was arrested for treason for advocating democracy in Taiwan. He was sentenced to eight years in prison in 1965 and put under house arrest later the same year after receiving a special pardon.

On Jan. 2, 1970, Peng left his family and began a 22-year exile.

At a book launch in Taipei yesterday, the 86-year-old shared his successful escape from the then-­Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime 39 years ago, which he describes in his book titled A Perfect Escape.

“I often ask myself: If I had made a different decision, what would have become of me?” Peng, former senior presidential adviser under the Democratic Progressive Party administration, told an audience yesterday.

After Japan’s defeat in World War II, Peng, who at the time was studying political science at the University of Tokyo, had to decide whether to stay in Japan or return to Taiwan.

If he had stayed in Japan, he would have had to change his Chinese name and would probably have ended up teaching, practicing law, writing or working in the public sector, Peng said.

“But I loved this country [Taiwan] so much that I wanted to go home … It did not take me long to decide,” he said.

Filled with patriotism and ideals, Peng was in for a major disappointment after he saw how the KMT was governing Taiwan.

Peng returned to Taiwan in 1946 and studied political science at National Taiwan University. In 1951, he obtained a scholarship to study at McGill University in Montreal. He was offered a job there, but turned it down. He studied law at the University of Paris and obtained a doctor of laws degree in 1954.

Peng said the KMT government tried to recruit him after his return from Paris. But after witnessing the 228 Incident, the imposition of Martial Law and the White Terror, he had to decide between serving under the KMT and securing wealth and status, or following his conscience and fighting for freedom and democracy.

In 1964, Peng was arrested along with two of his students, Hsieh Tsung-min (謝聰敏) and Wei Ting-chao (魏廷朝), for publishing the Declaration of Formosan Self-Salvation.

For his own safety and that of his family, Peng said he decided to flee the country. With help from various individuals — Peng said he had to be careful with details in the book to protect the privacy of individuals and respect the wish of those who helped him but wanted to remain anonymous — his escape took him through Hong Kong, Bangkok, the Soviet Union and Denmark before he arrived in Stockholm, where he was granted political asylum.

Peng later moved to the US with held from his friends and joined the campaign for Taiwan independence.

Peng yesterday lamented the dramatic change in Taiwan’s political climate since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was elected last year, saying the country seemed to be gradually returning to the old days when the KMT was in power.

“Can we accept that the eight years of freedom and democracy we enjoyed were just a short episode? Is it normal to have a foreign regime govern this land? We must carefully think about that,” he said.

Putting judicial reform on the agenda

Monday, Jun 15, 2009, Page 8

Prosecutor Hou Kuan-jen (侯寬仁) has been found innocent by the Taipei District Court and won an appeal after being sued for forgery by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), but Ma has again appealed — in his own words, for the sake of human rights. While Ma is entitled to appeal, he must take into account the position he now holds and its responsibilities. Unless his appeal is clearly part of an effort to push judicial reform, he risks being accused of pursuing the case against Hou to cover his own mistakes.

Yet whatever the outcome of his appeal, Ma stands to lose. If he wins his appeal, many will accuse the courts of bowing to the Presidential Office. If he loses, he could still be accused of attempting to meddle in the judiciary or of wasting judicial resources to pursue a personal vendetta.

Ma has said he was wronged during the investigation into how he used his special allowance fund while serving as mayor of Taipei. But the president has not proposed that the Ministry of Justice and Judicial Yuan discuss potential legal reforms to prevent similar situations in the future.

Ma was never detained during the investigation into his case, which has led some to question the decision to detain former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).

Ma seems concerned only with the outcome of his own case and not whether others are being mistreated by the judiciary, let alone with concerns that judicial independence and human rights in Taiwan have taken a beating in the past year. Yet these problems have caught the attention of law professor Jerome Cohen, who taught Ma at Harvard University. Cohen has written a number of articles calling on the government to pay attention to reform, but Ma has ignored his advice.

During the first year of Ma’s presidency, Taiwan has struggled with the impact of the global financial crisis. The government has been occupied with bolstering the economy and navigating the treacherous waters of cross-strait relations. Judicial reform is not on the agenda.

It remains unclear what Ma intends to do about the many aspects of the judicial system that are in need of reform.

When former Judicial Yuan president Weng Yueh-sheng (翁岳生) took office in 1999, he convened a national judicial reform conference that drew up a number of proposals, only some of which were implemented. Nor has Weng’s successor, Lai In-jaw (賴英照), made much progress on that front.

Taiwan’s judicial system is in need of reform, from the investigative process and indictment to the trial and sentencing. One of the major questions on the table is the fate of the stalled death penalty system — and the dozens of prisoners that remain on death row with no sign of sentence commutations in sight.

Ma’s government has signed two major international human rights covenants and promised to implement them, but these treaties will be meaningless if judicial reforms do not materialize.

In focusing on Hou, Ma has missed a chance to show greater concern for the nation’s judiciary.

A man we thought we knew: Ma Ying-jeou
　

By Li Kuen-long 李坤隆
Monday, Jun 15, 2009, Page 8

Everybody has their own opinion on the issue of unification or independence. I would personally support whatever is good for Taiwan’s future. I cannot take catchphrases like “betraying Taiwan” or “being unified” emanating from southern Taiwan seriously, because the separation of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait is real and no one will be able to change this situation in the short term. However, having observed the actions of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) — someone we thought we knew — since he came to power, we are becoming increasingly suspicious and feel that we no longer understand him.

While Ma now seems to be advocating the use of simplified Chinese characters, I seem to remember that he was firmly anti-communist before his election.

Since taking office, Ma has been leaning toward the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as can be seen in many things, from his statement on the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre to his plans to sign an economic cooperation framework agreement with China.

This may be the trend of the times and Ma may not have a choice, but this does not mean that Taiwanese should learn only to recognize traditional Chinese while writing with simplified characters, because there is a thin line between this and unification — or, rather, being unified.

If this continues, it will raise serious concerns for Taiwan’s future.

In ancient China, the standard for unification included standardized wheel width for carts and a standardized script. Today, Ma is promoting simplified Chinese without receiving any goodwill from Beijing.

This is not far from unification as seen by ancient Chinese — how can we not be worried?

Certainly, Ma must believe that he is on the cutting edge, just as former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良) thought history would remember him for proposing in 1995 that Taiwan “boldly go west.”

Ma seems to have forgotten that he is the nation’s leader, and that his every word and deed have direct and enormous, even lethal, impact.

Especially when a public consensus has not been reached on the matter, Ma’s proposal is almost certain to trigger a backlash.

After the DPP destroyed its own reputation, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was able to regain cities and counties in the south, but Ma’s proposal will give the DPP good leverage and affect moderate voters’ views of his stance on Taiwanese sovereignty.

As time passes, this will affect moderates’ trust in Ma. Since he plans to take over the KMT chairmanship, it is conceivable that the KMT’s advantage in the south would have been completely eroded by the time the year-end local government elections are held.

And, more importantly, many swing voters probably feel that they understand Ma less and less, and this lack of understanding is likely to create distrust. After all, a majority of voters have a bottom line regarding unification and independence — Taiwan and China can grow closer economically and culturally, but politically a clear line must be drawn.

Ma may see an acceptance of simplified Chinese characters as part of cross-strait economic and cultural exchanges, but it constitutes a form of political recognition.

If Ma insists on moving forward before people’s doubts have been dispelled, he would be wise to stay north of the Chuoshui River (濁水溪).

Li Kuen-long is a lecturer at the Kaohsiung campus of Shih Chien University.