‘Decades’ to unification, Ma’s aides say
　

TIMELINE: The Presidential Office said the ‘Wall Street Journal’ had misquoted President Ma Ying-jeou in a Nov. 25 interview the business paper published online on Monday
　

By Ko Shu-ling and Jenny W. Hsu
STAFF REPORTERS
Wednesday, Dec 16, 2009, Page 1

It will take “decades” for Taiwan and China to consider unification as the conditions are not currently ripe, the Presidential Office said yesterday, dismissing a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report that quoted President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) as saying that it will happen “in the next decade.”

Paul Chang (張國葆), the acting director-general of the Department of Public Affairs, said the paper misquoted Ma in an interview published online on Monday, adding that Ma was “stunned” when he saw the report and immediately asked him to straighten things out.

Playing a recording of the interview, Chang said what Ma said in the Nov. 25 interview was “decades,” not a “decade.”

On the tape, Ma can clearly be heard to say: “Whether there will be reunification as expected by the mainland side depends very much on what is going to unfold in the next decades.”

Whether the two sides will unite was a question that no one can answer at this stage, he was quoted as saying.

“But as the president of this country, I believe that the 23 million people of Taiwan want to secure one or two generations of peace and prosperity so that people on either side of the Taiwan Strait can have sufficient time and freedom to understand, to appreciate and to decide what to do,” Ma was quoted as saying.

The WSJ interview, headlined “Taiwan’s Detente Gamble,” said Ma saw the impact of Taiwan’s democracy on China as a historic opportunity.

“I want to create a situation where the two sides could … see which system is better for the Chinese culture, for the Chinese people,” he was quoted as saying.

But it’s a dream his counterparts in Beijing don’t share, the report said.

“The people on the Chinese mainland do not quite understand my policy,” the story quoted him as saying. “Sometimes they don’t understand why we don’t want unification. I said, well, it’s quite obvious that conditions for unification are not ripe. And we don’t even know each other that well.”

As with any country grappling with China’s rise, the report said the success of engagement will turn on how well Ma knows China.

“Critics say he’s too naive about the country he is dealing with,” the WSJ said.

“All of the various engagement efforts are, in essence, a bet that Beijing will turn out to be a reliable negotiating partner — a partner that can be trusted to, say, move its missiles away from the coast, or allow the full quota of mainland tourists to leave the country,” it said.

Ma emphasized Beijing’s military threat and Washington’s role in the interview, saying: “The relaxed tensions [across the Taiwan Strait] depend very much on the continued supply of arms from the United States to Taiwan ... Certainly Taiwan will not feel comfortable to go to a negotiating table without sufficient defense buildup in order to protect the safety of the island.”

Commenting on US President Barack Obama’s November visit to the region, Ma said he did not think Obama’s policy toward this part of the world deviated from that of his predecessors.

“And he also told his [Chinese] host that he would continue to sell arms for the defense to Taiwan,” Ma was quoted as saying.

On the planned economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with Beijing, the WSJ said Ma is not exactly a free-trader, but he understood Taiwan will suffer badly if it does not open up, adding that he is on a tight deadline.

Ma emphasized Beijing’s obstruction of Taipei’s efforts to ink free-trade agreements with other countries, the story said, but it said he was confident that Taiwan’s institutions will prove resilient in the face of any untoward influence from Beijing.

“We have more than 70,000 business firms investing on the Chinese mainland, employing millions of Chinese workers. They could have used that to, you know, interfere in our politics or whatever, and so far that’s not that prominent,” he was quoted as saying.

“This is a very democratic and transparent society. Anything of that sort would certainly be reported and affect the cross-strait relations,” he was quoted as saying.

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) said yesterday that Ma has no right to unilaterally determine the future of Taiwan.

Regardless of the word used by Ma, “he is in no position to unilaterally put a timetable” on Taiwan’s future, DPP Legislator Lee Chun-yee (李俊毅) said, panning the president for being “arrogant and presumptuous.”

Ma’s efforts for “eventual unification” are the antithesis of Taiwan’s democratic values and if the president betrayed the will of the public by reuniting with China, “he would force a large and bloody revolution,” Lee said.

DPP spokesman Chuang Shuo-han (莊碩漢) said more than 85 percent of Taiwanese support the status quo.

Ma’s comment shows that he is ignoring public opinion by veering Taiwan toward unification, Chuang said, stressing that decisions on Taiwan’s future must be determined by referendum.

Choosing Ma means choosing unification with China, said Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) Chairman Huang Kun-huei (黃昆輝), warning that signing an ECFA will expedite the unification process.

The best way to stop Ma from pushing for unification is by voting him out of office, Huang said.

EU, US call for Liu Xiaobo’s release falls on deaf ears
　

BEIJING WARNING: The Foreign Ministry said such appeals amounted to interference in China’s judiciary and outsiders had no right to do so

REUTERS , BRUSSELS AND BEIJING
Wednesday, Dec 16, 2009, Page 1

The EU and the US called on China on Monday to release a prominent pro-democracy writer and rights activist who faces trial on charges of subversion.

“The EU calls on the Chinese government to unconditionally release Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波) and to end the harassment and detention,” the 27-nation bloc’s presidency said in a statement.

The US State Department said it had repeatedly raised Liu’s case with Chinese officials and joined the EU in voicing concern for other signatories of the “Charter 08” petition last year demanding Chinese democratic reforms.

“The US government is concerned that Chinese citizens such as Mr Liu may have been detained or harassed solely as a result of having exercised a universal right to freedom of expression,” US State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said.

RESPECT URGED

“We urge the government of China to release Liu Xiaobo immediately and to respect the rights of all Chinese citizens to peacefully express their desire for internationally recognised freedoms,” he told reporters.

The 53-year-old Liu, who was jailed after playing a role in the 1989 Tiananmen democracy protests, was arrested last December after he coauthored the widely circulated petition calling for greater democracy.

Liu’s lawyer said last week prosecutors had decided to try Liu on charges of “inciting subversion of state power” for publishing essays critical of the Chinese Communist Party.

The vaguely worded charge is routinely used in China to jail dissidents and carries a penalty of up to 15 years in prison.

The lawyer said he expects his client to go on trial within four to six weeks.

Rights groups in China fear that after holding the former literature professor for more than a year without trial, officials have now sped up his prosecution and will rush the case through trial during the holiday season.

BEIJING’S RESPONSE

Meanwhile, Beijing yesterday warned Western countries against taking up Liu’s case.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu (姜瑜) said such calls amounted to interference in the country’s judiciary.

“These accusations are unacceptable. China is a country of rule of law. The fundamental rights of Chinese citizens are guaranteed by the law,” she told a regular news conference.

“I want to stress that Chinese judicial bodies handle cases independently. Outsiders have no right to interfere. We oppose any external forces using this case to meddle in China’s internal affairs or judicial sovereignty,” she said.

SPEEDY TRIAL?

Jiang’s comments underscored that the government was unlikely to heed the growing international pressure on behalf of Liu, who could face trial as soon as next week.

Liu’s wife, Liu Xia (劉霞), said yesterday that her husband had met his lawyer on Monday and been told to prepare to stand trial “very soon.”

Control Yuan censures accounting arm over Chen
　

‘IRREGULARITIES’: The Control Yuan said that the DGBAS did not probe the former president’s use of funds even though the audit department asked it to
　

By Shih Hsiu-chuan
STAFF REPORTER
Wednesday, Dec 16, 2009, Page 2

“The amount of the state affairs fund is about six to nine times higher than a president’s salary.”— Shen Mei-chen, Control Yuan member

The Control Yuan yesterday censured the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) for negligence in handling former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) alleged misuse of the “state affairs” fund.

Control Yuan member Shen Mei-chen (沈美真) said the DGBAS was involved in “serious irregularities” as it postponed investigation into the accountants who handled the fund in the Presidential Office after the scandal broke and it failed to clarify the fact that the nature of the state affairs fund was different from the “special allowance fund” to which government officials are entitled.

Chen and his wife, Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍), were given life sentences in September after being found guilty of corruption and embezzlement from the fund, while some of Chen’s former assistants were accused of helping Wu claim reimbursement using receipts from other individuals.

“The DGBAS was tasked with the responsibility of overseeing the operation of government accounting offices, but it had been excusing itself from probing the matter even though the Ministry of Audit sent it documents over and over again,” Shen said.

Shen said the DGBAS was also charged with coming to the presidential office’s defense by applying for a constitutional interpretation to wrongly argue that the state affairs fund was similar to the “special allowance fund,” which could be used at an official’s discretion.

The amount of the annual state affairs fund is between NT$30 million (US$930,000) and NT$50 million.

“If the state affairs fund were a kind of special allowance fund given to a president, it wouldn’t make any sense because the amount of the state affairs fund is about six to nine times higher than a president’s salary,” Shen said.

Saito cares for Taiwan, Ma cares for China
　

By James Wang 王景弘
Wednesday, Dec 16, 2009, Page 8

‘For Taiwan, this state of undecidedness is second in importance only to full recognition as an independent, sovereign state.’

President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government implemented a boycott of former top Japanese representative to Taiwan Masaki Saito after he said that Taiwan’s status remained undecided. Eventually, Saito had to resign for “personal reasons” early this month. This unfortunate outcome is the result of the government’s inability to know what is good for itself, as it is helping China to annex Taiwan while completely disregarding Taiwanese interests.

Based on the San Francisco Peace Treaty, what Saito said is a legal fact. For Taiwan, this state of undecidedness is second in importance only to full recognition as an independent, sovereign state. International support is necessary for Taiwan to protect itself against Chinese annexation.

Under the principles of international law, which do not support interference in the internal affairs of other countries, perhaps the best way for Taiwan to obtain international support is to gain recognition as an independent, sovereign state. Failing this, maintaining its undecided status is the nation’s best option.

Japan does not recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state. The San Francisco Peace Treaty does not specify who has sovereignty over the nation’s territory. Although China claims Taiwan as part of its territory, Japan merely expresses its comprehension of and respect for that claim, without recognizing its validity. This allows Taiwan to maintain the possibility of asserting de jure independence and autonomy.

If the government had advocated the idea that sovereignty lies with the people and that Taiwan’s democratic transformation has turned it into an independent state separate from China, it would certainly have been in a position to condemn Saito’s “unfriendly” remarks. This, however, is not the government’s stance. It still sees itself as a party to the Chinese civil war and a government in exile that is occupying Taiwan, and wants to link the nation’s sovereignty to China.

The government claims that the Republic of China (ROC) has sovereignty over Taiwan, but has also accepted the “one China” principle, thereby diminishing the nation’s status to that of a region of China. This stance is causing Taiwan even greater damage than Saito’s remark did.

Ma’s pledge that neither unification nor independence would take place during his presidency is inconsistent with his earlier goal of eventual unification, and this is in practice another version of the view that the ROC’s status is undecided. As a consequence, the ROC would disappear if China were to annex Taiwan, which means that Ma’s policy could lead to the annihilation of the ROC.

Saito’s description of Taiwan’s status as undecided is advantageous to the Taiwanese people’s claim to sovereignty, but Ma’s version of Taiwan’s undecided status is advantageous to China’s claim. Saito cares about Taiwan, while Ma cares about China.

James Wang is a media commentator.