Ma sending delegations to Washington
　

BRACING FOR IMPACT: The Presidential Office is concerned with fencemending after a legislative agreement to restrict US beef imports drew a strong protest from the US
　

By Ko Shu-ling and Jenny W. Hsu
STAFF REPORTERS
Thursday, Dec 31, 2009, Page 1

President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) instructed the executive and legislative branches yesterday to send representatives to Washington to mend fences after the US government warned that legislative moves to bar imports of some US beef and beef products would “constitute a unilateral abrogation of a bilateral agreement concluded in good faith” just two months ago.

On Tuesday, lawmakers from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) agreed that no ground beef or bovine offal from the US would be allowed to enter Taiwan. The DPP caucus accepted a revised KMT motion to amend the Act Governing Food Sanitation (食品衛生管理法) that would ban imports of “risky” substances, including brains, eyes, spinal cords, intestines, ground beef and other related beef products from areas in which mad cow disease has been reported in the past decade.

The decision will be finalized in a vote scheduled for Tuesday. Passage of the amendment will partially overturn the Department of Health’s (DOH) announcement in October that imports of US beef on the bone and bovine organs would be allowed.

The legislative move has caused dismay in Washington.

“We are deeply concerned and disappointed by reports that Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan has taken initial steps toward the passage of an amendment to the Food Sanitation Act that contains provisions that would unjustifiably bar the import of certain US beef and beef products,” the US Trade Representative office and the Department of Agriculture said in a joint statement on Tuesday.

“The proposed amendment’s provisions do not have a basis in science or fact and thus in no way serve to protect Taiwan’s food supply,” the statement said.

“If passed, this amendment would represent a new barrier to US beef exports to Taiwan, and would constitute a unilateral abrogation of a bilateral agreement concluded in good faith by the United States with Taiwan just two months ago,” the statement said.

“The Taiwan authorities should consider very carefully the impact that passage of the amendment in its current form would have on Taiwan’s reputation as a reliable trading partner and responsible member of the international community,” it said. “Science and facts — not politics or hyperbole — should govern our trade and economic relations.”

“This is a serious matter that concerns us greatly and we are monitoring the legislative process very closely,” the statement said.

Ma held a meeting yesterday to discuss how the executive and legislative branches should respond; attendees included Vice President Vincent Siew (蕭萬長), National Security Council (NSC) Secretary-General Su Chi (蘇起), Minister of Foreign Affairs Timothy Yang (楊進添), KMT Secretary-General King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) and DOH officials.

Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) told a press conference after the closed-door meeting that the Presidential Office respected the legislative consensus. The office also acknowledged that both the government and the legislature would have to shoulder responsibility for the issue.

The Presidential Office also supported an amendment that would allow the import of bone-in beef from cattle younger than 30 months old, Wang said.

In a bid to mend ties with Washington, Wang said Ma instructed the executive branch to send a delegation to the US next week to explain the situation in the hopes of minimizing damage to bilateral relations.

He also directed the legislature to form a lobbying group composed of lawmakers, experts, academics, consumers and civic group representatives to visit the US after the legislature goes into a recess late next month.

The Executive Yuan will discuss the issue during its weekly meeting today, Wang said.

This is not the time to decide who is to blame for the controversy because the nation needs to brace for possible repercussions, he said.

“It is bound to impact Taiwan-US relations,” he said. “The top priority is to focus on how to deal with the matter. We recognize the legislature’s intention to jointly shoulder the consequences.”

While the legislature is set to vote on a DPP proposal to hold a referendum on the matter, Wang said the position of the KMT caucus was clear. In other words, it would use its legislative majority to vote against the proposal.

The government had conducted risk assessment and opinion polls at the start of the year, Wang said, but he declined to comment on whether it had misjudged the situation, saying “the situation took an unexpected direction.”

He also declined to speculate on worst-case scenarios, saying he was in no position to comment, but if Washington did decide to retaliate, it might be economically.

“We hope we can persuade the US to understand and respect public opinion in Taiwan and understand the legislative consensus was reached through a democratic process,” he said.

Both the KMT and the DPP caucuses urged the US yesterday to respect the decision to amend the law.

KMT caucus secretary-general Lu Hsueh-chang (呂學樟) said legislators had to amend the law to safeguard the public’s health. A number of KMT legislators said the legislative consensus should serve as a reminder for the Ma government in future endeavors.

KMT Legislator Wu Yu-sheng (吳育昇) called the consensus a “warning” and urged the Ma government to review its actions.

“This experience can teach the government a lesson,” KMT Legislator Ho Tsai-feng (侯彩鳳) said.

Although the administration erred in signing the beef protocol with the US, it’s not too late to amend its flaws, Lu said.

By respecting the legislature’s decision, Ma was showing respect for democratic politics, Lu said.

DPP members said the US must respect the will of the Taiwanese on the beef issue because it has failed to convince the public of the safety of its beef products. The party also urged the Ma government to come clean on its “underhanded” beef deal with Washington.

“We strongly condemn President Ma Ying-jeou’s team for making backroom deals with the US which resulted in this ridiculous protocol. NSC Secretary-General Su Chi and senior officials of the Ma administration must be held accountable for this,” DPP spokesman Tsai Chi-chang (蔡其昌) said.

Despite its repeated assurances about the safety of its beef products, Washington had failed to provide enough scientific evidence and its video conference with a full line-up of meat experts “did not convince” the public, the DPP said.

Tuesday’s consensus represented the collective view of the Taiwanese and the US must understand as well as respect the democratic process, Tsai said. The DPP said it would continue to stand in solidarity with the public in safeguarding the public health.

The DPP also demanded that two supplementary items be added to the amendment — that the ban on meat from cattle older than 30 months be maintained and that a referendum on US bone-in beef imports be held.

Yang, however, said backing out of the protocol could hurt Taiwan’s international credibility and its trade relations with the US.

However, he used the phrase, “China-US relations” (中美關係) rather than “Taiwan-US relations” (台美關係).

Labor groups take aim at KMT
　

DIRTY TRICK: Protesters flung cow dung at police standing behind shields after President Ma and other KMT officials failed to come out to talk to them
　

By Mo Yan-chih and Shelley Huang
STAFF REPORTERS
Thursday, Dec 31, 2009, Page 2
　

Shouting “incompetent government,” several hundred members of 10 labor unions yesterday threw cow dung and clashed with police during a protest in front of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) headquarters as they urged President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to review a proposed amendment to the Labor Union Law (工會法).

The protesters said they would never agree to the KMT caucus’ proposed version of the amendment, which suggests the government has the authority to disband unions.

“We demand the government adopt the union’s version of the amendment. We want President Ma to come out and talk to us,” group leader Chu Wei-li (朱維立) said.

The union members also urged the government to carry out its promise of giving unions more authority over labor affairs and allowing them to supervise their own finances.

Ma, who arrived at KMT headquarters at about 2pm to preside over the KMT Central Standing Committee as party chairman, did not meet the demonstrators.

Failing to receive any response from Ma or other KMT officials, the protesters threw cow dung at the police, who stood behind barricades and shields. The police later held four protest leaders for questioning after they failed to stop the dung attack.

Shouting “Release our members,” the protesters later clashed with police as they tried to enter KMT headquarters and did not disperse until after Ma left the building.

Meanwhile, at a separate setting yesterday, representatives from civic groups criticized the government for what they said had been a year of empty promises and ineffective policies.

Representatives from a labor group, a teachers association and a banking union said this year could best be represented by the character “empty” (空), signifying a year of empty election promises on the part of the president and the loss of hope that the government would help struggling workers.

“The government has not sincerely followed up on promises that were made during the election campaign,” said Son Yu-lian (孫友聯), secretary-general of the Taiwan Labor Front. “The result is that workers on the bottom rung of the ladder can barely feel the economic recovery that is being reported in the media.”

Despite promises of stronger GDP growth and higher income per capita, this year has seen unemployment rates reach new highs, Son said.

Liu Chin-hsu (劉欽旭), secretary-general of the National Teachers’ Association, said Ma had promised to place labor-related course material on the public school curriculum, but a year had passed with no progress.

The civic groups gave the Ma administration a failing grade and said it needed to “retake the exam.”

They also said May 1 was the deadline for the “retake,” and if no significant improvement is made, the groups will take to the streets on May 20 to mark Ma’s second year in office.

Officials debate referendum on US beef
　

By Loa Iok-Sin
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Dec 31, 2009, Page 3

Government officials, academics and representatives from civic groups debated at a public hearing yesterday whether a proposed referendum on lifting the ban on certain US beef products should be approved.

The proposal asks voters if they agree with the Department of Health (DOH) decision to allow imports of beef organs, ground beef and bone-in beef from the US, and whether the government should renegotiate the beef agreement with the US.

Officials from the DOH, the Council of Agriculture and the Ministry of Economic Affairs have repeatedly stressed the safety of US beef and said that a referendum was unnecessary. However, Consumer Foundation chairman Hsieh Tien-jen (謝天仁) questioned on whether the government is capable of or determined enough to protect the health of consumers.

“National Security Council secretary-general Su Chi [蘇起] said that the Taiwan-US beef agreement has a higher legal status than domestic laws, so we’re not sure whether the agreement has a higher status than the amended law,” Hsieh said. “So why not leave the issue to be decided by the people in a referendum?”

DOH Bureau of Food Safety director Lin Hsueh-jung (林雪蓉) said the decision to lift the ban was based on scientific facts so should not be voted on in a referendum.

“Besides, the referendum proposal asks whether the decision should be voided and whether the government should renegotiate,” Lin said. “It violates the Referendum Act [公民投票法], which stipulates that only one question can be asked in one referendum.”

Former deputy minister of the interior Lin Mei-chu (林美珠), meanwhile, urged government representatives to stop talking about the safety of US beef.

“It’s not our job to decide whether US beef is safe, and it has nothing to do with whether the referendum should be voted on,” Lin said. “Our job is to determine if the proposal meets all the requirements to be a valid referendum, and, if so, it should make it to the polling stations.”

Lin said that waiving the lifting of the ban and renegotiation are two sides of the same issue, “so the issue of whether the referendum asks two questions does not exist.”

After the public hearing, the Cabinet’s Referendum Review Committee said it would make the final decision on whether the referendum proposal is valid next week at the earliest.

North Korea ‘stealing’ equipment

REUTERS AND AP , SEOUL
Thursday, Dec 31, 2009, Page 5

North Korea has been taking equipment left at a nuclear reactor site that was mothballed when an international consortium halted work on grounds Pyongyang was breaking an agreement, a news report said yesterday.

If the report is true, the looting would be in defiance of a deal the North reached in the 1990s with regional powers and could cloud a recent push to restart international disarmament-for-aid discussions.

Billions of dollars were poured into the project to build two relatively proliferation-resistant light water reactors for the North in return for a promise to freeze its nuclear plant that produces arms-grade plutonium. The deal was halted in 2002 with a third of the work finished.

North Korea may have used some of the more than 200 pieces of heavy equipment taken from the site in the country’s northeast to stage a nuclear test in May, South Korea’s JoongAng Ilbo newspaper said, quoting government officials.

“The removal of equipment without taking steps to settle financial issues is a clear violation of the agreement and can be construed as theft,” one official was quoted as saying.

South Korea bore the majority of the costs spent on the project arising from a deal called the Agreed Framework, signed in 1994 by the US and North Korea. A consortium called KEDO to build the nuclear plants also grew out of the deal.

Equipment left behind at the site is valued at 45.5 billion won (US$39 million), including cranes and bulldozers and nearly 200 trucks and other vehicles, the JoongAng Ilbo said.

Most of the 6,500 tonnes of steel and 32 tonnes of cement left behind has also been taken from the site by the North, which is desperately short of building material.

South Korea’s Foreign Ministry could not confirm the report but said it has asked the North every year for confirmation of KEDO’s rights to the equipment. The North has said nothing would be allowed to be shipped out until the project is restarted and complete.

Meanwhile, the North’s New Year’s wish of seeing the destruction of a massive concrete wall dividing the Korean Peninsula never seems to come true — mostly because there is no such barrier.

Mentioning the wall by the North has been an odd New Year tradition begun by state founder Kim Il-sung and kept alive by a fawning propaganda machine that dares not correct a person revered as a deity. Kim died 15 years ago and is considered the state’s “eternal president.”

The peninsula is divided by a 4-km wide Demilitarized Zone with razor wire fences on the North and South side, but with no huge, concrete barrier.

That did not stop the North’s ruling party newspaper yesterday from demanding that the wall be demolished because “it runs diametrically counter to the desire and demand of the nation and the trend of the times.”

A few weeks after the Berlin Wall started coming down in 1989, Kim said in a New Year’s address that Seoul had built a massive concrete wall to divide the two states. Analysts said Kim made the claim to rally support for his state as its communist allies were fading.

The North’s official media has painted a vivid picture of the wall that is not there. It says the border wall is 5m to 8m high, is as thick as 19m and was built in the 1970s by a “South Korean military fascist clique.”

On a more realistic note, the two Koreas opened new, updated military hot lines yesterday to help facilitate border crossings, an official said in Seoul. The new hot lines replaced outdated copper cable hot lines that will remain as spare lines, Unification Ministry spokeswoman Lee Jong-joo said.

US beef as an ECFA litmus test

Thursday, Dec 31, 2009, Page 8

Defying the executive branch once again, the legislative caucuses of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) on Tuesday reached a consensus to ban “risky” beef products, including bone-in beef, offal and ground beef, from areas where cases of mad cow disease have been documented in the past 10 years.

This outcome is a stern rebuke for President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration, which in October said it would relax restrictions on beef imports — but without any political preparation. Not only was there no prior consultation with local health experts, but it was also in blatant defiance of a legislative resolution from 2006 that requires the Department of Health to submit a detailed report to the legislature before lifting bans on US beef.

At an unscheduled press conference yesterday, Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) said that after the legislative recess, Ma would form a task force of lawmakers, experts, civic groups and consumer groups to visit the US on a fact-finding mission.

An obvious question is why Ma did not think of this before acting unilaterally and negotiating with the US on lifting beef bans. Had he done so, he could have saved himself the embarrassment that has eventuated.

Ever since the health department announced the easing of restrictions in October, the legislature has been paralyzed by ongoing disruptions-cum-boycotts by the DPP caucus, which wanted to pass its own amendment to an act governing food hygiene.

The next question is whether anyone from the executive responsible for this political and diplomatic mess — say, National Security Council Secretary-General Su Chi (蘇起), who ought to be dealing with security threats, not food fights — will be held to account for the resources that have been wasted on this issue over the past two months.

The outcome on the legislative floor on Tuesday will teach Ma and his executive branch a lesson: Just because the KMT holds a majority in the legislature does not mean the KMT’s legislative caucus will comply with Ma and the executive branch’s agenda. Consultation within the party would now appear to be just as important as consultation outside it.

But it remains to be seen if the Ma administration will indeed treat this instability as a lesson. The litmus test of any newfound wisdom will be the progress of the proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA), which the government has been pushing to sign with China.

The Ma administration to date has refused to entertain holding a referendum on the issue. There might be arguments justifying this position, but it is not clear that the government can tell the difference. If the government’s motivation is simply one of unilateralism, then it won’t be able to say that it wasn’t warned when this issue degenerates.

Earlier this week, amid the brouhaha over whether Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) was a “C-list” politician, Mainland Affairs Council Chairwoman Lai Shin-yuan (賴幸媛) said “there is no such thing as ‘A-list’ or ‘C-list’ in cross-strait exchanges because the [public is] the most important factor.”

So now the waiting game begins, as voters and politicians on both sides of the fence watch to see if the Ma administration will let the public be “the most important factor” in mapping cross-strait policy, or whether it is about to suffer another rebuke for forging ahead with an ECFA without anything resembling a domestic consensus.

Globalization and political strategy
　

By Soong Hseik-wen 宋學文
Thursday, Dec 31, 2009, Page 8

The results of the elections for city and local mayors, county commissioners and city and county councilors came as a surprise. But in all of the explanation and analysis of the results, one key aspect was overlooked — the international factor.

Over the past year, there were three major issues in which Taiwan was influenced by international factors.

First, Typhoon Morakot in early August killed around 700 people. The disaster attracted international attention, and both the US and China expressed a willingness to help. The US sent ships carrying helicopters to help with relief efforts. This was an example of international rivalry and globalization exerting influence on Taiwanese domestic affairs, and was seen by political scientists at home and abroad as having considerable diplomatic and security implications. The government came under criticism at home and abroad for inefficiencies in its disaster relief work, and this became a latent factor in party politics.

The second issue is the ongoing controversy over the government’s decision to lift a ban on imports of certain US beef products. The debate has made Taiwanese aware of how issues relating to globalization can affect their daily lives.

The third issue, and the one with the greatest and most far-reaching influence, is the new stage that has been reached in cross-strait relations.

Cross-strait relations over the past couple of years have been friendly and lively, a development that has been welcomed by the US, Japan and other countries, as well as many Taiwanese industrialists.

However, the government has not been sufficiently transparent about the process, the legal aspects and its agenda as it prepares to sign an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA). Therefore, the public does not fully understand what is going on.

It usually takes six or seven years of preparation before countries will sign a free trade agreement, but Taiwan and China are near to inking a similar agreement after just two. Many experts and academics, as well as the political opposition, question whether the ECFA process has been rushed and not properly thought through.

Many feel that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration, keen to improve relations and promote trade across the Taiwan Strait, has made too many concessions too fast to Beijing on Taiwan’s sovereignty. The KMT means to stand by the “1992 consensus” and its slogans “one China, with each side having its own interpretation” and “setting aside controversies about sovereignty,” but there is considerable disquiet that this might result in a denial of Taiwan’s sovereignty itself, and that Taiwan’s status as a country will become even more troubled and vague.

External factors include US President Barack Obama’s China-friendly policy, which differs significantly from that of the previous administration, while newly elected Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has also taken a clear China-friendly line. China continues to pursue a big-power foreign policy based on “peaceful development,” pushing its own unilateral interpretation of “one China” and limiting Taiwan’s “flexible diplomacy.”

All these factors have contributed to an underlying anxiety among Taiwanese, and these concerns were to some extent reflected in the recent city and county election results. It is worth noting how these elections, though local in nature, exhibited to some extent voting behavior based on national identity — something rarely seen in previous local elections.

A key factor in future elections will be the knowledge and ability of candidates and their support teams on cross-strait relations and Taiwan’s strategic position in global affairs. After the ECFA is signed, economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region will continue apace, and this will involve subtle changes in relations between the US, Taiwan and Japan. Consequently, national sovereignty and security will be crucial campaign issues in next year’s elections for mayors and councilors in Taiwan’s five special municipalities, and in the 2012 presidential and legislative elections.

In the meantime, the globalization of economics, trade, human rights, culture and national security will accelerate. Consequently, the public will have greater expectations of local governments in dealing with international affairs. Candidates and their support teams will have to cultivate knowledge and abilities regarding cross-strait and international relations so that voters can trust them to handle whatever situation may emerge.

Soong Hseik-wen is director of the Graduate Institute of Strategy and International Affairs at National Chung Cheng University.