US Supreme Court rejects Taiwan case
　

DENIED: The court declined to hear an appeal by activist Roger Lin that claims the US has been the principal occupying power of Taiwan since the end of World War II
　

By William Lowther
STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON
Wednesday, Oct 07, 2009, Page 1

The US Supreme Court has refused to hear a lawsuit brought by Taiwanese activist Roger Lin (林志昇) that argues that the US is the principal occupying power of Taiwan and should still control it.

The terse rejection by the highest US court scuttles Lin’s legal maneuvers in the US and at the same time could end an attempt by former President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) — sentenced to life in prison last month — to win his freedom through Washington.

Under a one-sentence ruling known as “certiorari denied,” the Supreme Court declined to hear the case and allowed a prior ruling to stand.

That ruling came in April when the US Court of Appeals sided with the US government on Lin’s case and reaffirmed that US courts do not deal with political matters.

Legal analysts said in Washington on Monday night that as far as the US legal system was concerned, the case brought by Lin and expanded by Chen can go no further in the US and has been dismissed.

Lin first brought the case to US courts in December 2006, arguing that Japan relinquished control over Taiwan and Penghu after World War II, but did not return it to China.

He wanted the US courts to decide what rights the Taiwanese have under the San Francisco Peace Treaty and the US Constitution, including whether they should be issued US passports.

Lin said the treaty did not ­address sovereignty over Taiwan and Penghu, and that the US was therefore still the principal occupying power.

Judges from the US Court of Appeals had some sympathy with Lin’s arguments, but ruled in April: “America and China’s tumultuous relationship over the past 60 years has trapped the inhabitants of Taiwan in political purgatory.

“During this time the people of Taiwan have lived without any uniformly recognized government. In practical terms, this means they have uncertain status in the world community, which infects the population’s day-to-day lives.”

But they added: “Determining Appellants’ nationality would require us to trespass into a ­controversial area of US foreign policy in order to resolve a question the Executive Branch intentionally left unanswered for over sixty years: who exercises sovereignty over Taiwan. This we cannot do.”

The case took an unusual twist last month when Chen — convicted of taking bribes while in office — claimed Taiwan was still technically under US military occupation and that the Taiwanese government had no legal right to try or detain him.

Latching onto Lin’s suit, Chen, 58, filed his own case in the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in Washington.

The US financial news ­service Bloomberg quoted Shih Cheng-­chuan (施正權), a professor of international affairs at Tamkang University in Taipei, as saying: “Chen Shui-bian is a desperate man and he is trying to use any trick to get out of jail. There is little chance that the US will meddle with the case.”

Coen Blaauw, executive director of the Washington-based Formosan Association for Public Relations, told the Taipei Times: “Taiwan’s future will not be determined in a court of law. Only the people of Taiwan have the right to determine Taiwan’s future. There are no tricks or short cuts to full Taiwan independence, it might be a long and difficult road but it’s the only way to go.”

Uighur activist decries terror label
　

By Hu Hui-ning
STAFF REPORTER, IN LONDON
Wednesday, Oct 07, 2009, Page 3
　

“It was truly disappointing that the Taiwanese government accused me of being a terrorist without any evidence,” World Uyghur Congress (WUC) secretary-general Dolkun Isa said in a telephone interview with the Chinese-language Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister paper) in Munich, Germany on Saturday.

Minister of the Interior Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) last month recommended that the government prohibit exiled Uighur leader Rebiya Kadeer from visiting Taiwan, claiming that the WUC, of which Kadeer is president, “is closely associated with an East Turkestan terrorist organization … and it would be in the best interests of Taiwan and its people to prohibit her from visiting the country.”

Jiang also said Isa was on a list of “important international terrorist organizations/individuals promulgated by Interpol.”

Responding to government claims that he is a terrorist, Isa said he had sought legal advice in Germany and may take legal action to call on the Taiwanese government to apologize for its accusation.

He said he had checked Interpol’s Web site and consulted with his lawyers, but could not find his name on the international police organization’s wanted list. He was only blacklisted by the Chinese government, he said.

Isa stressed he had no problems in traveling around the world. Even South Korean authorities, which denied him entry to the country last month, did not accuse him of being a terrorist.

Isa gave a speech in Taiwan in 2006. The government made no effort to prevent his entry. Isa said he was therefore surprised that the present government’s move to deny Kadeer entry to the country would also lead to him being branded a “terrorist.”

As a totalitarian state, Isa said it was no surprise that China listed all individuals advocating political self-determination as terrorists, but he was taken aback and disappointed that the Taiwanese government had also made allegations against him.

Saying that he advocates peace and had never touched a gun, bullets or bombs in his life, Isa added he had only ever suggested that political confrontation between Uighurs and the Chinese government be settled through peaceful negotiation. Beijing, however, only uses weapons to oppress dissent, he said.

Isa said he has lived in Germany for 14 years, becoming a naturalized citizen in 2006. Noting that both Germany and the US were countries dedicated to fighting terrorism, Isa said if he were a terrorist, Germany would not have granted him citizenship nor allow him to move about freely.

Isa said China had also labeled students peacefully protesting in Tiananmen Square in 1989 and Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama as terrorists. He said it had never occurred to him that he would be accused of being a terrorist and even more surprising was that democratic Taiwan would follow China’s lead.

Isa said the Taiwanese government’s accusation against him would only undermine its international profile. He said he had thought the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) today was different from the KMT of the 1960s and 1970s following long-term reform. It is clear that the new KMT is the spitting image of the old KMT, he said.

Isa said that if the KMT copied the Chinese Communist Party in oppressing dissenting voices and making false accusations, its long-term efforts to reform over the years would have been futile. Taiwan might turn into another China championing nationalism and ignoring minority voices. Isa said he did not understand why the Taiwanese government was fingering him as a terrorist, noting that even US human rights foundations supported Uighur organizations.

Isa said he had received many telephone calls and e-mails from Taiwanese saying that they felt deeply ashamed of their own country’s actions. Some Taiwanese lawyers had even expressed their willingness to take legal action on his behalf, he added.

Isa said he still wanted to visit Taiwan again as its commitment to strive for democracy mirrored his efforts to fight for his own land.

Taiwan, with its hard-earned democracy, has the right to determine its own future, Isa said. China should respect the views of the Taiwanese people and forego its military threats against a democratic state, he said.

NTDTV blackouts serve as a warning

Wednesday, Oct 07, 2009, Page 8

News that New Tang Dynasty TV (NTDTV, 新唐人電視台) broadcasts by carrier Chunghwa Telecom experienced a series of blackouts last month could be the most disturbing and direct effort yet on the part of Beijing to censor the flow of information in Taiwan.

The station reported a series of interruptions to its broadcasts in the run-up to the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China and a complete blackout on the day of the anniversary last Thursday.

Chunghwa Telecom is attempting to locate the cause of the problem and the National Communications Commission (NCC) has launched an investigation. Democratic Progressive Party Legislator William Lai (賴清德), meanwhile, expressed concern that Beijing was the culprit.

There are a number of reasons to suspect that China is involved. Chunghwa said it has been unable to identify any technical problems with its broadcasting equipment. Moreover, the timing of the blackout would have been a symbolic victory for Chinese authorities, which have long waged a campaign against the TV station. Beijing resents NTDTV’s strong focus on the persecution of Falun Gong in China and its steady stream of coverage on other human rights abuses there.

This would not be the first time that meddling by China has affected the station’s operations, but if Beijing is behind these latest problems, it would be a warning to anyone who believes China does not seek to curb free speech in Taiwan.

Only recently, Kaohsiung’s rescheduling of a documentary about Uighur activist Rebiya Kadeer, followed shortly after by the government’s refusal to grant her a visa to visit in December, raised concerns that Chinese pressure was disrupting human-rights-related events beyond its borders.

Taiwanese lawmakers have taken a clear stand on NTDTV’s right to broadcast before and should do so again. In 2005, dozens of legislators (along with their counterparts in the US, Canada and Europe) expressed concern that Chinese pressure had stopped a French company from renewing a contract with NTDTV. The contract with Eutelsat had allowed NTDTV to broadcast into China, evading Beijing’s tight control on information.

Eutelsat later re-signed with NTDTV, but last year, NTDTV’s transmission into China stopped as transmissions in other parts of the world continued. Eutelsat cited “technical problems,” but last year Reporters Without Borders released evidence — in the form of a taped recording of a Eutelsat employee — indicating that Eutelsat had cut the transmission to appease Beijing. The International Federation of Journalists and the European Parliament expressed concern about the reasons for the disruption.

While it is commendable that the NCC is probing broadcast disruptions in Taiwan, Chunghwa Telecom has said it would be difficult to link the source of the disruptions to China. Nevertheless, every effort must be made to identify the cause.

If Beijing was behind the blackout on Thursday, it would indicate that China is not concerned with a potential backlash in Taiwan, whether it be in the form of a rebuke by lawmakers or the government, or even a public outcry.

Ironically, it is precisely this arrogance and aggression on the part of Beijing that reminds the public of the value of free speech — and of Beijing’s malice toward Taiwan’s freedoms. In this context, and if Beijing indeed was involved, this “triumph” over NTDTV would amount to little.

A wake-up call for the Aborigines
　

By Jerome Keating
Wednesday, Oct 07, 2009, Page 8

‘If Aborigines think they will fare better because of temporary handouts from China, they are sadly mistaken.’

Typhoon Morakot did more than expose the incompetence and lack of leadership in President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration. It highlighted another salient issue: the plight of Taiwan’s Aborigines.

Like many indigenous peoples suffering the fate of colonialism, these people are pulled in opposite directions. Tugging on one side is the wish to maintain traditional lifestyles and identities; on the other are the demands of survival and dignity in a modern, fast-paced and high-tech society.

As a result, they are being marginalized to the point of extinction. Even if they do fit in, at best, they often face a life of second-class citizenship that teeters on the brink of welfare. If ever the Aboriginal community needed vision and leadership, it is now.

Where to find it? The sight of Aboriginal villages washed away and wiped out after Morakot was horrendous. Worse, however, is the realization that the causes of the problem were not limited to the typhoon. The devastation came as the result of lack of strong environmental policies and after mountainsides denuded of trees were unable to stop mudflows. Then there is the fact that decisions on deforestation were made by profiteers and forces outside the sphere of influence of the villagers.

Living in isolation on ancestral lands, Aborigines are often removed from the ­decision-making processes around them. Further, without pursuing pertinent related education and degrees that would help legitimize community members and businesses in influencing the government’s decision-making processes, they find their lives controlled from the outside.

The Aborigines do participate in Taiwan’s democratic mechanisms, but they have not learned to use their votes to their advantage. Like any minority, they must fit in.

But while certain affirmative action policies are in place for education and the like, their leadership has no grand plan for their people. Instead, for example, they are satisfied with “vote-buying handouts” and small gifts.

The Aboriginal vote has always favored the wealthy Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — like a dog begging for scraps. This, in effect, is selling a birthright for a mess of pottage.

As they pick up their scraps, the Aborigines have been unable to grasp the larger reality that the KMT is a Sino-centric party shaped by its hierarchical Confucian philosophy. Thus, no matter how pleasant or inflated the talk of the Han, the Aborigines will always rank as second-class citizens and/or Uncle Toms.

Further, Aborigines tend to ignore how they have been culturally denigrated and stereotyped as lazy and as drunkards with loose morals — by the very same hand that gives them a dole.

One way to counter this cultural stereotyping is to elect new leaders who are able to relate to and stress a Taiwanese identity for them. DNA research has demonstrated that 85 percent of Taiwanese have Aboriginal blood. By this, Aborigines are not a minority but part and parcel of the majority. They share a common heritage with most Taiwanese. Only one group, the waishengren — Mainlanders — is not one with them; yet it is those same ­waishengren who buy them off cheaply and look down on them.

In establishing a vision of fitting in, the Aborigines must realize that their best hope is in building a Taiwanese identity. It is only within the framework of this identity that they will be able to find and maintain true dignity and a competitive and cultural advantage.

Because of this, Ma is actually their worst enemy. He has repeatedly tried to emphasize the fabric of zhonghua minzu — Chinese ethnicity — with all of its hierarchical implications and baggage. Ma’s paternalism has already been demonstrated on numerous occasions by talking to Aborigines as if they were children.

The answer to Aboriginal problems will likewise not be found in legislators like Non-­Partisan Solidarity Union Legislator May Chin (高金素梅), who receives money from Beijing, because Beijing operates within the same paternalistic, hierarchical paradigm. A simple look at the plight of the Tibetans and the Uighurs demonstrates the results of that hierarchy. Both groups have become aliens and suffer in their own lands.

If Aborigines think they will fare better because of temporary handouts from China, they are sadly mistaken. Morakot should be their wake-up call. Where have 50 years of handouts from the KMT gotten them?

Aborigines of all tribes must forge an alliance with Taiwan’s environmentalists — both in politics and in life. This is a natural alliance because all want to preserve and protect ancestral lands. Included in this must be the commitment of some Aborigines to long-term education in such matters, just as some must make a commitment to areas such as Austronesian studies.

Research points to how the vast Austronesian linguistic family across the Pacific and Indian oceans originated in Taiwan. This should spur Aborigines on to recapture their dignity and rightful place in the community. Pride in the past will never be found in an outmoded zhonghua minzu, but in an empire that they once built — and why it was lost.

Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.