Following Formosa

"Fate protects fools, children, and ships named Enterprise."

2005-03-29T04:30:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, Wednesday March 16 2005

Special Report: March Against “Anti-Secession” Law

Last Sunday several hundred thousand Taiwanese marched in Taipei to protest mainland China’s “anti-secession” law. The fact that Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian broke precedent by taking part in the march personally has affected the domestic political situation and created the possibility that the recent warming in relations, marked especially by the historic Lunar New Year flights, might have been for nothing. This week’s report will describe the nature of the protests while paying particular attention to discrepancies with reports in Western news sources, describe the probable domestic repercussions, and conclude by examining possibilities for cross-strait relations in the future.
Although most news agencies outside of Taiwan reported that around a million people took part in the march, it should be noted that Taipei’s police department put the estimated number at a little over 200,000. Moreover, many polls indicated that a significant amount of Taiwanese were opposed to the march because of fears that it would provoke China. Although some American newspapers described this as simply a march to oppose China’s “anti-secession” law, your correspondent, who attended the march, found this not quite to be the case. Many groups participating were extremely anti-China. Signs saying “Fuck China” or “China is the Devil” were common. Some groups called not only for independence from China, but to actively work to undermine the Chinese Communist Party. Because Chen joined the march along with such groups as these, the fact that their presence was not highlighted by Taiwanese or Western news sources may have been a fortunate accident.
The fact that President Chen personally marched is significant because of his recent overtures to a pro-Chinese political party, the People First Party. The PFP Chairman had urged Chen not to participate in the talks and to rather take the high ground. However, Chen had recently been losing support from his own pro-independence camp because of his promises to the PFP Chairman, namely, not to pursue independence during the rest of his final presidential term. Chen’s use of the march to reclaim leadership of the pan-green (pro-independence alliance) may have upset his alliance with PFP, and also thereby hurt future chances of improving cross-strait relations. He did not, however, make a speech to the demonstrators, which can be seen as a concession to the PFP. A speech would have been seen as much more inflammatory to the CCP.
Despite threats that Taiwan would adapt some type of legislation to respond to the anti-secession law, it seems that this will not be the case. In fact, the Taiwanese government has been relatively mild in its concrete response to the anti-secession law, despite very loudly expressing disappointment and frustration. Although possibilities for more direct flights have been put on hold, it seems that no more significant responses on the Taiwanese side are in the making. Rather, it seems that the Taiwanese government is waiting for more signs from across the strait before making any decisions. It seems that this may be a wise course of action, as Condoleezza Rice recently commented in an interview that CCP officials promised that after the anti-secession law was passed they would take steps to lower cross-strait tensions.
It should be noted as an aside that despite the historic march, the biggest news story in Taiwan recently has been the announcement by a former independence-supporting businessman that he supports the anti-secession law and that reunification was the only practical future for Taiwan. Xu Wen-long of the Chimei Group claimed that the anti-secession law was helpful for businessmen to understand that investing in the mainland had to be done under the understanding that reunification was a historical inevitability. However, Xu’s previous support for independence causes makes this declaration quite surprising. It is suspected that this “change of mind” is due to pressure from the CCP. If this is the case, it would seem that China is increasing pressure on Taiwanese businessmen not to support independent causes. If seen in concert with the anti-secession law, it would seem that China is increasing its tough policies with China. Chinese President Hu Jintao has talked of a “hard-soft” approach with China. This pressure on Taiwanese businessmen, along with the anti-secession law, can be seen as the hard-approach. Taiwan is now waiting to see if the “soft” side of China is next on the agenda.

Historic Trip to China by KMT Officials

One of the vice-presidents of the Nationalist Party (KMT) recently traveled to China to pave the way for a trip by the KMT President, Lien Chan, sometime in the near future. This is a historic trip, the first by KMT officials on an official visit since 1949. Several officials in the ruling Democratic Progressive Party have described this as a selling out to China during a time requiring national unity in the face of the “anti-secession” law.
The KMT official, P.K. Chiang, will meet with a member of the Chinese Standing Committee of the Politburo, Jia Qinglin. Chen Yunlin, who is in charge of the government department charged with dealing with the Taiwanese question may also sponsor a dinner for Chiang.
Chiang has said that this trip shows that the Chinese are only willing to deal with the KMT, not with the more independence leaning DPP. However, Chiang has no right to negotiate with the CCP. A Taiwanese government official said of the trip that, “Any such negotiations have to be first authorized by the MAC (Mainland Affairs Commission.” Both sides of the political aisle in Taiwan will try to use this trip as a political weapon. However, it is clearly a historical occasion, especially if it clears the way for Lien Chan to travel to the mainland.

So, Captain, how long shall we stare at each other across the Neutral Zone?

2005-03-16T07:32:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, Wednesday March 16 2005

Special Report: Anti-Secession Law

This past Monday the People’s Republic of China passed a law with a clause regarding the possible use of “non-peaceful” measures to solve the Taiwan question, sparking major political repercussions in Taiwan and reactions from countries throughout the world. This week’s report will begin by examining the contents of the law itself, and how it has been presented by the Chinese Communist Party to the outside world. It will then examine the Taiwanese reaction and the foreseeable future for cross-strait relations. Finally, international reactions will be discussed.
Most of the law in question actually has to do with peaceful reconciliation of Taiwan and China. The law describes ways in which Taiwan and China can cooperate pending a final status solution, and assures sincerity on the side of the Chinese. However, one clause does include the possibility of using force against Taiwan. Under three conditions, China can “legally” use “non-peaceful” measures to solve the Taiwan question. If the Taiwanese are about to enact legal independence, an “incident” makes independence imminent, or if all possibilities for peaceful resolution are gone, China then must consider using force. The law also says that no outside interference should be tolerated. It should be noted, however, that the law was changed since it was first introduced, a fact that is both overlooked by most reports and was seen by most analysts as unusual. One clause was changed from, “Taiwan is a part of China” to “Taiwan and China constitute a single China.” However, the former line was entered at a different part of the law. Another change was that the law originally read that non-peaceful means of unification would be used if all conditions for peaceful reunification were gone. It was amended to say non-peaceful means would be used if all possibility for peaceful reunification were gone. These changes, along with other several others, show that Chinese officials decidedly to make the law less severe even after it was shown to the outside world.
Chinese officials have done their best to portray this as a “peace” bill rather than a “war” bill. Premier Wen Jiabao commented that this law was solely directed at “splittists” in Taiwan, and that in the eventuality of war China would do its best to protect the people of Taiwan. He said that the real danger to stability in the Taiwan strait is supporters of independence for Taiwan. Wen also mentioned in uncharacteristically belligerent terms that China did not fear outside interference in the Taiwan question, and said that Japan and America must not violate Chinese sovereignty. Other officials have gone so far as to say that this law indicates no change in Chinese policy toward Taiwan.
As mentioned above, China softened the anti-secession law before passing it, and many analysts attribute this to the extremely negative reaction to the bill in Taiwan. 93% of Taiwanese reject the use of force to solve cross-strait difficulties, 84% say Taiwan is not an inalienable part of China, and 71% say outside involvement is warranted with regards to reaching a final status agreement.
Taiwanese officials have said that the passing of the anti-secession law will require a total reevaluation of cross-strait policies. They criticized the bill by saying that it gives a blank-check to the military and is intended as a threat. Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian commented that “"If they ignore the strong opposition of the international community and go ahead with the legislation, it risks raising tensions and setting off the crisis of a full-phase backtracking of relations." More charter flights during the Tomb Sweeping Holiday seem unlikely, and Taiwanese restrictions on investment in the mainland will not be lifted, and may even be strengthened. The potentially most destabilizing reaction the Taiwanese could make to the anti-secession law would be to have a “defensive” referendum on Taiwanese identity, or possibly reform the constitution. The ruling party has said they will not pursue this course, but will not block such a movement, saying that it would be entirely China’s fault for originally unilaterally changing the status quo. President Chen is calling for a million people to march on March 26 to protest the law and keep international attention on Taiwan’s isolation. Many analysts believe that Chen sees this as a political tool to reclaim leadership of the independence camp after recently softening his policies and disappointing radicals. Chen also believes that the anti-secession law is an opportunity to show the world that Taiwan is not the problem because of unilateral steps toward independence, but rather that China is the “bad guy.” If he decides to take this route, it will end a warming in relations over the last few months. Some Chinese analysts have already described the anti-secession law as a mistake, as it was originally intended to threaten “splittists,” but those “splittists” had made conciliatory remarks in the last several weeks and can now describe China as ill-intentioned. Some analysts believe that relations will swiftly get back on track, describing the anti-secession bill as the “hard” part of Chinese President Hu Jintao’s “hard and soft” approach, meaning being strict with regards to Taiwanese independence but proactive in terms of cultivating Taiwanese trust and positive impression of the mainland.
The rest of the world has had a mixed reaction to the law. The US State Department has described the bill as "not helpful in the current environment, where there are opportunities for exchanges that could move forward a peaceful resolution of outstanding cross-Strait differences." Secretary of State Condolleeza Rice and White House Spokesman Scott McClellan have also expressed disappointment in the law. Russia and Pakistan support the law, while Europe has had a mixed reaction. The European Union is opposed to the use of force to solve the Taiwan question, and therefore many say that the EU, in protest of this law, should not cancel its weapons sales restrictions on the PRC. However, most analysts believe that despite a possible delay the sanctions will still be lifted. Australian officials have said that in the eventuality of war in the Taiwan Straits, Australia may activate its ANZUS alliance with the United States and provide direct or indirect support to US forces.

Who likes pirates? I do!

2005-03-02T06:30:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, Wednesday 2 2005

A. Japan and US See Peace in Taiwan Straits as Strategic Objective

B. Possibility of Regular Flights?

C. Taiwanese President Does Not Rule out Reunification; Major Political Repercussions

-Japan and US See Peace in Taiwan Straits as Strategic Objective
For the first time, Japan has stated that a peaceful resolution to the crisis in the Taiwan Straits is a strategic objective that it shares with the United States. This is a significant change in past policy, as Japan normally avoids the topic in order not to displease the Chinese government. However, a number of recent developments have caused the Japanese government to see China as more of a threat and to take a harder line, and Japanese actions as well have angered Chinese officials.
Both sides have recently taken maneuvers seen by the other side as provocative. A Han-class Chinese submarine entered Japanese territorial waters and was chased by Japan’s Self-Defense Forces for two days. Several analysts have claimed that this action may have been a test of Japan’s resolve should China invade Taiwan. Japan recently occupied a lighthouse built by nationalists in the 1970s on a small island in strategically and economically valuable area to which both countries lay claim. Li Teng-Hui, a former Taiwanese president, was granted a Japanese visa. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi still visits Yasukuni Shrine, a cemetery with several war-criminals from World War II. Both sides lay claim to the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu in Chinese), an issue that for a long time was dormant but has flared up again due to other factors. Competition for resources has also been a source of contention, as both sides tried to persuade Russia to build a pipeline that favored their interests, with Japan winning the deal in the end. Japan’s Defense Ministry also recently released a report that saw China’s military as a threat in the near-term, confirming Chinese suspicions.
The influence of these developments, among others, have pushed Japan and the US closer strategically, causing the US Secretaries of Defense and State, as well as their Japanese counterparts, to declare after their recent “2+2 meeting in Washington that Taiwan should be defended in the wake of an unprovoked Chinese attack. The Taiwanese representative in Japan commented that, “This is the first time that Japan has made its stance clear; in the past Japan has been very indirect on the Taiwan issue.”
Because of Japan’s Constitution, it would be unable to take direct military action to resist any Chinese invasion of Taiwan. But this declaration seems to imply that in the event of war Japan would agree to support US forces with logistical support, like transportation, as well as conduct medical rescue missions behind the lines.

-Possibility of Regular Flights?
On February 16, Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian called for talks on direct cargo flights between Taiwan and the mainland. He said at a dinner held for Taiwanese businessmen working in China that, “I hope to re-open the door for negotiators and to promote plans to make cargo shipments using the Lunar New Year charter flights as a basis.” Chinese newspaper editorials, frequently used to convey the feelings of senior government officials, have also recently called for regular direct flights, both for cargo shipments and individual travellers. China called for the Taiwanese authorities not to pursue such agreements because of “narrow-minded political calculations,” and to accept the “Hong Kong” basis for new talks. This refers to a previous agreement that each side would adhere to the “One China” policy but reserve the right to interpret that concept in its own way.
Despite the recent warming of cross-strait relations and the stated desire of both sides to pursue more direct flights, it is not clear whether or not it will be possible to accomplish. Chen has refused to accept the “One China” policy on any condition, and due to Taiwanese security concerns it may be difficult to allow for so many planes of unclear origins to fly daily across the Taiwan Straits. The Taiwanese Mainland Affairs Council also says that only Taiwanese authorized by the government would be allowed to negotiate with the mainland.
If direct cargo flights were allowed, it would increase cross-strait economic ties to a new level. Many Chinese officials feel that increased economic ties would decrease hopes for Taiwanese independence, and show good will toward Taiwan. It would also signify that should Taiwan pursue independence, the economic repercussions, let alone military confrontation, would be unacceptable.

-Taiwanese President Does Not Rule out Reunification
Taiwanese President Chen Shui-Bian recently met with James Soong of the opposition People First Party. Their joint statement after the meeting, in which Chen agreed not to pursue independence and did not rule out eventual reunification with China, has sent shockwaves throughout the political world. Another important result of the meeting was that it has shown the degree to which American officials are directly involved with Taiwanese politics.
In the joint statement, Chen said that he would, “not rule out the possibility of any model of relationship evolving on the basis of goodwill.” He also said that he would not pursue independence, would not change the name of the “Republic of China”(Taiwan), nor would he put these issues to referendum for the rest of his term, which ends in 2008. These commitments go much farther than Chen has ever promised before. The meeting comes after several years of hostility between the ruling and opposition parties, of which James Soong’s People First Party is one. The PFP is heavily pro-China. After the recent legislative elections in which opposition parties retained their majority, Chen was forced to try to cooperate with the opposition in order to accomplish any of his objectives. However, Chen’s Democratic Progressive Party, is heavily pro-independence, and many of the party faithful felt that Chen sold them out after this meeting. In fact, the DPP’s more radical “pan-green” ally, the Taiwan Solidarity Union, has threatened to stop cooperating with the DPP. At the same time, the Nationalist Party, the PFP’s nominal ally, felt left out of the meeting, and are wary of PFP-DPP cooperation not in the interest of the Nationalist Party. Soong claims that the whole meeting was masterminded by the United States government. He asked reporters at a news conference, “Do you think President Chen will talk to me without the Americans?” He also said that American officials used swear words to refer to President Chen, and that they told him, “the cross-strait situation was far more serious than the Taiwanese authorities assumed.” Some analysts say that claims of American involvement have some credibility, as the US does not want any trouble in East Asia while it is distracted in the Middle East, and that by giving Soong a high profile he might not as ardently oppose an $18 billion weapons purchase. In any case, although cross-aisle relations might not be as unfriendly as before, trouble within the two camps themselves has gotten worse.

I'm Spartacus!

2005-02-02T18:04:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, February 2 2005

A. Significant Shift in Chinese Policy Towards Taiwan

B. Important Mainland Officials Visit Taiwan

-Significant Shift in Chinese Policy Towards Taiwan
In the last several weeks analysts have identified a new pattern emerging in Beijing’s Taiwan policy, and a recent speech commemorating former leader Jiang Zemin’s “8 Points” on the issue have confirmed that Hu Jintao’s government has begun to pursue a slightly different technique to deal with the island. Simply put, China has begun to use a carrot and stick method, in part by simultaneously threatening Taiwan with a new anti-secession law, occasionally mentioning the possibility of war, and not allowing Taiwanese businessmen who support independent activists to do business in China, while at the same time calling for direct cross-strait flights, more unofficial agreements regarding trade, travel, and mail, and sending high level officials to visit Taiwan in commemoration of a deceased, respected negotiator. (See below).
Chang Wu-Ueh of Tamkang University Institute recently commented that, “If China wants to be soft, it will be softer than before. If China wants to be hard, it will be harder than before.” China is in essence trying to give the Taiwanese a choice between absolute war and a reunification process that falls within Taiwan’s interests.
One Chinese official commented that China was open to negotiation with any Taiwanese politician, “regardless of his past rhetoric and actions.” This goes farther than previous statements, which blamed specific politicians for the increase in tensions. This statement seems to imply that even the Taiwanese President, Chen Shui-bian, is also included. Yet any politician who wants dialogue with the mainland still must accept the one-China principle, and that has been the dealkiller up to this point in time. In any case, analysts say that these changes can partly be attributed to Hu’s desire to put his own stamp on Taiwan policy, and partly attributed to the feeling that after pro-independence parties failed to capture the legislature in Taiwan a more conciliatory approach would damage Chen’s support for independence policies.
Two issues that define this new policy are the cross-strait flights and anti-secession law. Up to this point, the cross strait flights have been a success, and Chinese Major General Wang Zaixi has said that these flights, “provide a good model and create good conditions” for establishing direct trade, transport and mail. It is a new page in cross-strait relations and a real success. Yet at the same time Chinese government and party officials are considering passing an anti-secession law that would oblige the Chinese government to use military force to ensure that Taiwan does not attempt to formally separate itself from the mainland. Taiwan has condemned the action as a unilateral change to the status quo, but it seems China will pass (rubber-stamp) the law in the near future. Some see it as a Chinese version of the Taiwan Relations Act. When seen together, it becomes clear that the PRC is trying to make the choice for Taiwan clearer; certain war and defeat or significant economic benefits.

-Important Mainland Officials Visit Taiwan
The highest level visit by Chinese officials to Taiwan in ten years recently occurred when Sun Yafun, Vice President of the mainland’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait, as well as its Secretary General Li Yafei, visited Taiwan to commemorate the decease of a prominent Taiwanese diplomat. Although the two will not hold any talks or meet officials, comments they made and the timing of their visit are significant, causing many to describe the visit as a culmination in a relaxation of tension in the Taiwan Strait.
Sun stated that, “I haven’t visited Taiwan for nearly eleven years and I really want to visit there again so I can better understand the people who live there.” The two Chinese officials also said they hoped that more substantive discussions could take place soon, and even bowed to the picture of the Taiwanese diplomat, Koo Chen-fu, for whom they came to Taiwan to commemorate.
Moreover, this visit comes in the wake of several significant events. A new Taiwanese Prime Minister, Frank Hsieh, has called for cooperation with China and a lessening of tensions. A few days before, the historical cross-strait flights began. And finally, the Chinese side in a ceremony celebrating Jiang Zemin’s first declaration of his “8 Points” regarding Taiwan said that the PRC was willing to negotiate with any Taiwanese despite his past. Moreover, the high level of these officials is significant as well. While it is not clear where the next steps might be taken to increase cooperation, the atmosphere now is better than it has been for several years.

Interesting Article on Taiwan in National Review
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/blumenthal200501270741.asp

Joseph Torigian
Jptori@umich.edu

It's back!

2005-01-20T06:30:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, January 19 2005

A. Talks Between Taiwan and the United States

B. Historical Charter Flights

C. Truth Commission Calls for Taiwanese President to be Recalled

-Talks Between Taiwan and the United States
Officials in the United States State Department and the Pentagon have recently met with important Taiwanese leaders to discuss developments in the Taiwan Straits. Chairman of the opposition People First Party James Soong sat down with top Washington officials while he was on vacation following the failure of his party in the recent legislative elections. While the talks were confidential and unofficial, related officials have indicated that Soong was pressured to cease his opposition to Taiwan’s purchase of an expensive American weapons package and to push for compromise with the ruling party. Soong was also urged to work towards dialogue between China and Taiwan. Soong is one of the most important politicians in Taiwan, and the fact that high-level officials met with him is significant because it shows that the US has not ceased contact with all high-profile Taiwanese officials, albeit these contacts continue in a private capacity.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Assistant National Security Director Stephen Hadley also took time to brief Taiwanese officials on a recent meeting with the mainland Chinese Director of the Taiwan Affairs Office, Chen Yunlin. Chen’s goal was to persuade the United States not to resist a new state law being considered by the Communist Party. Although it is clear that this “anti-secessionist law” would somehow legally force the Chinese government to use force to solve the Taiwanese question should Taiwan pursue independence (a counter to the Taiwan Relations Act) its exact contents have not been divulged. Although Armitage and Hadley expressed concern that such a law would only escalate cross-strait tensions, it seems clear that the US will not comment directly on the law until its contents are revealed, most likely when it is passed by the National People’s Congress, a rubber-stamp committee. The US officials discussed these talks with two Taiwanese leaders in Washington, and also told the two politicians that 2005-2006 were critical years in cross-strait relations. Taiwan should engage in quiet-diplomacy with the mainland, but the US would not mediate.

-Historical Charter Flights
For the first time in half of a century, Taiwanese and Chinese passenger planes carrying businessmen will fly across the Taiwan strait without first stopping at Hong Kong or Macao during the Chinese New Year. However, planes will still have to first pass through Hong Kong or Macao’s air space. One million Taiwanese executives work in the mainland, and their demands for a chance to return home to visit their family during the holidays have turned into political pressure that resulted in these flights.
The Taiwanese Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Joseph Wu has suggested turning these flights into a tradition, and even possibly expanding the charter flights to other common holidays. However, China has yet to react to this announcement, and future charter flights will depend on the success of the ones currently planned.
Taiwan did not allow cross-strait flights for five decades because of security concerns, and those concerns still linger. When asked why Songshan Airport in Taiwan and Chingchuankang Airport in Taichung were not opened to Chinese flights, security issues were cited. However, even these considerations are slowly disappearing. Ministry of Joint Strategy Section Chief Lee Chieh-chiu commented that the slow speed of airliners would give the Taiwanese military time to react to a danger, and that those flights would be easily identifiable. Furthermore, Lee said that a “Trojan Plane” of invading Chinese commandos would have no chance of success.
The implications of this agreement are still unclear. The agreement happens in the midst of a buildup of tension in the straits caused by Chinese threats of the use of force and Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian’s steps to more concretely separate Taiwan from the mainland. One implication is that Chen will be able to claim that agreements can take place between Taiwan and China without Taiwan first accepting the “one China principle,” which China has demanded as a condition for talks. It is a step in the right direction, but so far it has had no concrete impact on other issues of cross-strait concern.

-Truth Commission Calls for Taiwanese President to be Recalled
The Truth Investigation Committee, created by opposition parties in the legislature following the disputed presidential election last March, has released a report saying that the assassination attempt on the day of the election was a political farce. Wang Ching-feng, a spokesperson for the commission, said that, “The motive behind the March 19 Shooting is to manipulate the election.” The Committee sent a 150-page report to the legislature suggesting that Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian be removed from office for refusing to cooperate with the investigation and because of the faked assassination attempt.
The government countered by noting that the highest court in Taiwan found the Committee to be unconstitutional because of the broad powers enumerated it by the opposition-led legislature. Therefore, most involved agencies refused to provide the Committee with information regarding the incident. “This indicates that the commission arrived at its assumption without the support of any concrete documents or evidence. Its report is outrageous and completely unacceptable, Chen Wen-chung, a presidential spokesperson, said.
The opposition parties have greeted the announcement with a lukewarm reception. Although they agree with its findings, neither opposition party feels that public opinion would allow them to recall the president. Moreover, parties on both sides of the aisle have recently been trying to work together. Therefore, it does not seem that this finding will have a significant impact on the current political situation.

Taiwanese Election

2004-12-15T01:21:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, December 15 2004

Special Report on Taiwanese Election: Defying Expectations of Analysts, Opposition Parties in Favor of Closer Ties with Beijing Maintain Majority in Legislature

A: The Numbers

B. Interpretation

C. Repercussions: Domestic and International

The Numbers: (225 Seats Total)

Pan-green (Political parties loyal to President Chen Shui-bian, including Democratic Progressive Party and Taiwan Solidarity Union):
101 seats

Pan-blue (Opposition parties, including Kuomintang and People First Party):
114

Others (Non-partisan Solidarity Union and Independents:
10

Interpretation:
On December 11 the Taiwanese went to the polls to vote for the National Legislature. Most analysts have described the results as an upset by the opposition pan-blue, consisting of the Kuomintang (KMT and People First Party (PFP), over the pan-green parties, made up of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU). However, it should be noted that although most Western news sources have described this as a big victory for the opposition, and the KMT may very well may derive momentum from its victory, the Legislature now looks exactly like it did before the election, with the pan-blues picking up only a single seat.
The interpretation of the results as an “upset” stems from the fact that most polls indicated that the pan-greens would win a majority. The more concrete difference is that the make-up of the pan-blue and pan-green representation has drastically changed, with the larger KMT and DPP parties taking seats from their smaller coalition partners. This has already caused some fighting within the two camps, with the PFP blaming its poor showing on the KMT’s refusal to cooperate in the election. Yet the fact that the KMT and DPP did better at the expense of their smaller and more radical allies shows that Taiwanese are more interested in preserving the status quo with China than rocking the boat.
Also, although the pan-blues have a significantly larger share of seats than the pan-greens, the vote-share between the two camps was almost the same (see below for reason), which means that the political leanings of Taiwanese have not significantly changed. The largest change between the presidential election in March and this latest election for the legislature is that the turnout was much lower than usual, showing that many Taiwanese are becoming turned off by political feuding.
As mentioned above, most analysts thought that the pan-blues would pick up a large number of seats, in part because the opposition was in disarray. The KMT and PFP failed to combine before the election. The KMT continues to be tainted by accusations of dirty money obtained when it instituted one party rule. Most importantly, Lien Chan and James Soong, chairmen of the KMT and PFP and presidential and vice presidential candidates in the March election, refused to recognize the results of that election. They created chaos in Taipei, including some violence, by calling for massive protests. Many Taiwanese were incensed by this. Yet the pan-blues still succeeded. Why? The results of the election can be explained primarily by two factors: serious flaws in election strategy by the pan-greens, and discomfort with President Chen Shui-bian’s election-eve pandering to supporters of Taiwanese independence.
The pan-greens, expecting a huge amount of support, were simply over-confident. In Taiwan’s political system, every county sends a number of representatives to the legislature, and they are selected by whoever wins the most votes. Therefore, candidates not only compete with other parties, they also fight with other members of their own party for the same group of votes. The DPP nominated too many candidates, spreading the vote too thin. Also, confident voters voted for weaker candidates hoping they would succeed, while stronger candidates failed as well. Many strong DPP candidates were unable to run because they are serving in the administration.
Chen in the runup to the election was desperate to win a majority so that he could push through his constitutional amendments (or new constitution) and place Taiwan closer to formal independence during the last years of his second term. He was also nervous about his smaller coalition partner, the TSU, gaining votes by appealing to a sense of Taiwanese nationalism and identity. He therefore based his campaign on identity politics, calling for fundamental changes to the constitution, deciding to use “Taiwan” to apply to the UN, and changing “China” to “Taiwan” at overseas departments and state-industries, insulting the intelligence of most observers by claiming that this name-change was intended to cut down on confusion. When the US commented that it was not in favor of this last move, many Taiwanese thought Chen might be going to far. One analyst of the election said that the US essentially defeated Chen. Finally, the Taiwanese president neglected to face bread-and-butter issues, allowing the KMT to use its patron-client relationships to bring out the local vote. Chen ran a national campaign and lost the local elections.
China may have also influenced the vote. In the weeks before the election, the PRC made comments intended to make clear that it would not accept Taiwanese independence and military force might become the only option. It did not, however, tie these comments directly to the election and was mostly quiet in the few days before voting. In the past, Chinese threats have increased the vote for pro-Taiwanese independence parties. Taiwanese may have decided that slowing down on the road to independence was a safe bet, especially after rebukes from the US.

Repercussions: Domestic and International
On the domestic front, it seems that Chen has decided that the best way forward is to cooperate with the opposition, which is a good sign for a country that has been beset by standoff and gridlock over the last four years. He says that he will become a president for all of Taiwan, not just that of his party. He says that he humbly respects the vote results, and that the “DPP is willing to take the first steps toward reconciliaton.” When announcing his resignation from the post of DPP chairman, his voice was choked with sobs. He said the DPP would adjust its pace and make readjustments after this loss. It is clear that he fully expected to win, and is personally reeling from the surprise results.
Relations with the United States will probably not change dramatically. However, the victorious pan-blue oppose the purchase of American weapons, which Washington says is essential if Taiwan wants to prove to the US it is serious about its own defense. It will be much more difficult politically for the US to protect Taiwan if the weapons purchase is not successfully concluded.
Most analysts also do not believe that the results will have any serious immediate affect on cross-strait relations. Although the pan-blue support closer ties to China and have criticized Chen for risking war by provoking the mainland, that does not necessarily cross-strait talks are in the making. Indeed, China may feel that Chen and the Taiwanese-Independence camp is losing momentum and that refusal to negotiate may make them even more politically isolated. In the long term, however, the pan-blues will be in a position to block Chen’s attempts to change the constitution, or take other steps that would bring Taiwan closer to de jure independence and simultaneously anger China.

I am a graduate of Starfleet Academy; I know many things.

2004-12-01T03:48:00.000-08:00

Again, the Word file with my report has hyperlinks to a bunch of sites. If you want the exact sites because you're interested, please let me know.

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, December 1 2004

A. Taiwanese President Calls for Referendum on Constitution, US Expresses Anxiety

B. Taiwan Excluded from ASEAN

C. Taiwan’s Credit Rating Threatened By Cross-Strait Tensions

-Taiwanese President Calls for Referendum on Constitution, US Expresses Anxiety
Recent comments by Taiwanese President Chen Shui-Bian about a referendum on a “new Taiwan Constitution” has led the United States to ask for Chen to explain his comments, which in essence can be interpreted as a mild rebuke and warning. Chen has called for the termination of Taiwan’s current “Chinese constitution,” likening it to “a child wearing an adult’s clothes.” He plans for a referendum on a Taiwanese constitution in 2006, and its implementation on May 20, 2008, the day of the inauguration of Taiwan’s next president. He said that it was imperative for his “pan-green” supporters to win a majority in the Legislature in December 11 elections for his plans to be able to succeed.
Chen has been ambiguous about the nature of the changes. Although he says that the new constitution would be created specifically to meet the island’s needs, he defers on the question of whether or not it would be an entirely new constitution, or merely consist of amendments to the one currently in place that was brought to Taiwan by the Nationalists. Chen says of the issue, “The most important thing is to actually kick off the constitutional reform program, not a battle of words over ‘constitution-making’ and ‘constitution-revising.’”
In Taiwan this subtle terminology reverberates far behind domestic politics. Most analysts see Chen’s objective is to separate Taiwan from the mainland in a more concrete way by fundamentally changing its mainland-origin constitution. Although Taiwan has changed the constitution a number of times in the past, the scope of the Taiwanese government’s current plans is clearly far more expansive. China’s former foreign minister Tang Jiaxun has weighed in on the subject, saying that Chen was trying to create an “atmosphere of propaganda.” Tang also accused Chen of exploiting China’s hosting of the 2008 Olympics by provoking China with a constitutional referendum at a time when China was preoccupied. Communist-controlled news agencies have also said that China would go to war to prevent Chen from making a new constitution.
State Department Spokesperson Richard Boucher has called on Chen to reassert his support of the “four nos,” those being not declaring independence, not changing the country’s name, (officially “the Republic of China,”) not including a clause regarding Taiwanese existence as an independent sovereign state in the constitution, and not holding a referendum on changing the status quo. Boucher stressed that, “We are opposed to any referendum that would change Taiwan’s status or move toward independence.” Chen has stated that he continues to adhere to the aforementioned “four no’s.” Yet despite Chen’s repeated statements of commitment, he has already decided to apply to the United Nations using the name Taiwan, not Republic of China. Also, it seems that his plans for a “Taiwanese Constitution” could be seen as a violation of his previous promises. It is uncertain how seriously his statements should be taken because of the December election, but it seems clear that the problem of Taiwan’s constitution should be the biggest problem, and potentially most destabilizing factor, in East Asia for the next few years

-Taiwan Excluded from ASEAN
The Taiwanese Minister of Foreign Affairs has claimed that China’s agreement to form a free trade area with the ASEAN nations is a deliberate effort to isolate Taiwan. According to MOFA, this trade agreement is a deliberate attempt by the mainland to economically isolate Taiwan from the rest of Southeast Asia.

-Taiwan’s Credit Rating Threatened by Cross-Strait Tensions
Standard and Poor’s has cut Taiwan’s economic outlook from stable to negative because of fears that cross-strait tensions will spiral out of control. Alan Tseng, a vice president at Capital Securities, commented, “The S&P downgrade was definitely a piece of bad news, especially to overseas investors, because it came from what's seen as an objective outsider voicing concerns over cross-strait tensions.” In conjunction with China’s deliberate attempts to economically isolate Taiwan, Taiwanese economic and political independence could likely become less feasible.

-For an excellent article on the possibilities and repercussions of the upcoming Taiwanese elections in Asia Times, please go to http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FL01Ad03.html.

Joseph Torigian
jptori@umich.edu

Who is the Kwisatz Haderach?

2004-11-24T03:27:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, November 24 2004

A. APEC Conference and Cross-Strait Relations

B. Taiwanese President Unveils some Potentially Destabilizing Policies

-APEC Conference and Cross-Strait Relations
The recent APEC Conference in Santiago, Chile was notable for a number of developments regarding cross-strait relations. Chinese President Hu Jintao met with President George W. Bush and they discussed Taiwan in detail. Hu spent a large amount of time lecturing Bush on the situation between China and Taiwan, and a spokesperson for the Chinese side said of the discussions: “The US side should perceive the dangerous nature of Taiwan independence and work together to check the separatist activities there.” Bush responded by criticizing the missile buildup in Fujian province across from Taiwan, and urged Hu to scale back the military presence in the area to reduce tensions. Secretary of State Colin Powell said that Bush, “passed on our concern that there are so many missiles on the mainland pointed at Taiwan.” At the same time, the two seemed to have worked out an informal agreement. Bush agreed to not support Taiwanese independence while China agreed to support the rebuilding of Iraq and work with America on the issue of North Korea’s weapons program. Furthermore, senior US officials in Washington said that China “understood” the importance of cross-strait dialogue, which some analysts interpret as a possible sign that China might be more open to talking with Taiwan. A final important footnote regarding this meeting is that the US briefed Taiwan on what was to be discussed at the meeting before it took place, which was stressed because of Taiwan’s shock and outrage at Powell’s comments in Beijing several weeks ago because of not being previously notified. A representative of the Taiwanese government mentioned, “US authorities briefed us on their basic policy line ahead of the Bush-Hu talks on the sidelines of the ongoing informal leadership meeting of the APEC forum in Santiago the previous day.”
Another important meeting at the conference was between Taiwan’s representative, Yuan T. Lee, the head of Academica Sinica (the top government research institute in Taiwan) and Hu Jintao. It is the highest level meeting between the two sides in twelve years. At most conferences the Chinese side ignores the Taiwanese delegation. Lee described the conversaton as cordial and thathe and Hu could “talk like friends,” but the two sides completely disagreed on what was discussed. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Kong Quan said, “The core element of their conversation was that the one China principle must be adhered to.” Lee, however, said, “We didn’t raise cross-strait issues because they were unrelated to the APEC summit.” Lee blamed China’s comment on the fact that the Chinese mention “the one China principle” all the time and the recent statement was nothing to be surprised about. It is clear, however, that this meeting is an important development when seen in tandem with the US officials’ comments on the Hu-Bush talks.
The final meeting that deserves mentioning is that of between Lee and Bush. Lee said that, “While I was talking with Putin, Bush patted my shoulder from behind and that Putin that I’m a Nobel Prize winner in Chemistry.” Lee congratulated Bush on his re-election and was introduced to the first lady. It seems that this type of small talk was the extent of the conversation.

-Taiwanese President Unveils Several Potentially Destabilizing Policies
Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian has recently warned that if China continues to “bully” Taiwan, Taiwan would be forced to consider a referendum on “one country, two systems.” Chen said at a campaign rally, “We would like to tell Beijing that if you force us too much, we will not exclude putting these demands as topics for referendums.” This came about after the leader of the opposition pan-blue camp, Lien Chan, tried to call the president’s bluff by suggesting that the president sponsor a referendum on reunification or independence. This would put pressure on the president to support a policy he knew would be destabilizing but pleasing to his voter base. The President countered by saying a bill past last year by the dominant pan-blue camp in the Legislative Yuan known as the “bird-cage” Referendum Law prevented certain types of referendums, including those regarding independence and reunification. A referendum on “one country, two systems” would be legal, however. Yet Chen did promise that if his pan-green camp was able to gain a majority in the December 11 election, he would reform the Referendum Law to allow for more types of referendums, each of which potentially destabilizing to the Taiwan Straits.
At the same time, Chen has been supporting new policies that he believes would make Taiwanese de facto independence and sovereignty more clear to the international community, which he believes would thereby make de jure sovereignty more likely. He has called for changes to Taiwan’s education system to focus on Taiwanese history rather than Chinese history, to change the country’s emblem, and even to change the country’s national anthem. Most importantly, he has also called for a complete overhaul of the country’s constitution to make it a “normal” country. As Chen has also been calling for dialogue with the mainland, it is unclear what his future plans for cross-strait relations might be. As most analysts tend to agree that the green-party will have at least a slim majority in the Legislative Yuan after the elections, Chen might start making the most concrete steps so far towards Taiwanese independence. Things may soon come to a head.

Assimilate this!

2004-11-17T05:26:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, November 17 2004

A. Developments in Cross-Strait Relations

B. Textbook Controversy

C. Taiwanese President Claims He Discovered Coup Attempt

-Developments in Cross-Strait Relations
The Chinese and Taiwanese have recently sent each other a series of mixed signals regarding their intent towards cross-strait relations, and analysts are unclear about their significance. On the Chinese side, Wang Zaixi, the Vice Minister of the Taiwan Affairs Office, said in a rare interview that armed conflict may become inevitable. He accused Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian of exploiting the mainland’s current focus on the economy and 2008 Olympics. He also personally attacked Chen, saying that he was insincere and double-dealing, and described the Taiwanese government’s decision to change textbooks to focus on Taiwan rather than China (see below) as, “ridiculous and laughable.” Yet he also held out hope for negotiations by saying that the one China principle was the sole condition for talks. He claimed that, “The one China principle is the most fundamental, most basic, and necessary consensus.” Also in the last week, Chinese President Hu Jintao said rather conciliatory words about Taiwan to a group of Chinese in Brazil. He said that the China’s priority was on economic development rather than cross-strait reunification, and that Chinese on both sides of the strait were “one family.”
Chen said Hu’s words showed, “some goodwill toward the expectation of a gradual thaw in the lingering cross-strait stalemate.” He also called Wang’s interview “a sign of goodwill,” surprising many analysts because of Wang’s decidedly threatening and uncompromising words toward Taiwan and Chen personally. Chen also has been trying especially hard to establish direct flights with the mainland. While Chen has recently repeatedly called for talks with the mainland, he has taken two serious steps sure to anger the PRC. He has said that Taiwan would apply as a member of the United Nations under the name Taiwan rather than the Republic of China (it’s current name), and he is trying to change Taiwanese textbooks to marginalize Chinese history.
Some analysts have attributed Chen’s seemingly erratic behavior to the upcoming legislative elections in December. The decision to apply to the UN as “Taiwan” and to change the high school textbooks shows that Chen is playing to his base to help his party win. At the same time, by showing an attempt to engage China he is soothing voter fears about whether or not he is a loose cannon that could provoke retaliation. If those overtures are sincere is unclear. On the other hand, it is certain that the PRC neither likes nor trusts Chen, but is not certain whether or not recent Chinese statements indicate more willingness to engage Taiwan, or if that interpretation reads too much into the statements.

-Textbook Controversy
The Taiwanese government will change high school history classes by separating Chinese history from Taiwanese history in an attempt to create a stronger Taiwanese identity. Taiwanese history is currently part of Chinese history courses, but after the change one third of the classes will be about Taiwanese history, one third about Chinese history, and another third about world history. In 2005, teachers will be forced to make the change, and they are not pleased with the decision. The Chairman of the Taipei High School Principals Association said it would become impossible to grade exams because of students graduating at different times and that students would become “schizophrenics” because of the confusing nature of the change. Radical teacher unions also disagreed with the decision, saying that the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s decision to change the textbooks according to their own views was just as bad as the KMT’s decision to do so when they were in control of the country. The Kuomintang also denounced the education reforms, claiming that it would provoke China and was just politics being played out in the education system.
The most controversial part of the decision was to include the founding of the Republic of China by Sun Yat-Sen as part of ancient Chinese history, not Taiwanese history. Taiwan is the truncated version of the Republic of China, which fleed to Taiwan in 1949, so this decision has been criticized by many people. According to the China Post, the new text will focus, “on Taiwanese heroes, human rights abuses in the days of martial law under the KMT and the 2-28 massacre of local Taiwanese by KMT forces in 1947.”
Of course, the Chinese are not pleased. Xinhua wrote, “"Behind the move is simply a separatist ambition to gradually dilute the Taiwan people's sense of being Chinese." State Council Taiwan Affairs Office spokesman Zhang Mingqing called it a trick to promote separation.
Clearly, this decision to change the textbooks in such a way is important. The decision was obviously very political and the new class schedule has a distinct political agenda. The new textbooks will deliberately ignore or neglect important connections between China and Taiwan, and will certainly anger the mainland. It also could possibly make it harder years in the future should a final status agreement ever be discussed.

-Taiwanese President Claims He Discovers Coup Attempt
Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian has recently claimed that the opposition attempted a coup in the seven days after his re-election, causing a firestorm in Taiwanese politics. Chen said that a number of former generals talked to top brass in the Taiwanese army in an attempt to get them to retire in mass to destabilize the government and throw its credibility into question. The Kuomintang have accused Chen of being illogical and unfairly casting aspersions on the armed forces. Chen has yet to provide evidence of the coup. Most analysts attribute Chen’s words to the upcoming election and a desire to draw sympathy votes, and many say that Chen’s words are potentially destabilizing for a country whose democracy is not yet fully mature.

Hi Worf! Eat any good books lately?

2004-11-10T05:03:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, November 10 2004

A. Implications of US Election for Taiwan

B. Court Rejects Bid to Nullify Presidential Election

C. New Poll Numbers

D. Arms Purchase Delayed Until After Election

-Implications of US Election for Taiwan

Taiwanese analysts feel that despite the loss of several influential members of the Taiwan Caucus in Congress because of retirement or unsuccessful election campaigns, support for Taiwan in the Senate and House should remain strong. Florida Democrat Peter Deutsch and Pennsylvania Democrat Joseph Hoeffel, both strong supporters of Taiwan, lost bids for the Senate. Two other losses for the Taiwan Caucus include Tom Daschle, whose bid for re-election was unsuccessful in South Dakota, and Zell Miller, who retired. Despite these setbacks all four chairmen of the Taiwan Caucus were re-elected.
Deutsch was the most serious supporter of Taiwan to lose office, as he was the leader of a group of congressman who feel that Taiwan should enjoy independence. He claimed that George Bush pressured the Republican leadership in Congress not to bring up a resolution in support of Taiwanese President Chen’s referendum on Chinese missiles pointed towards Taiwan. In a speech in the House, Deutsch also called for dual recognition of both Taiwan and China and Taiwanese membership in the UN and other international organizations. Despite his defeat, Taiwanese analysts feel optimistic about support from the House, which is usually pro-Taiwan and more antagonistic toward China, although this sentiment may become more subdued in the next session. As for the Senate, it normally neglects to pass bills that include serious help for Taiwan, but usually passes symbolic bills indicating support.
Although the expectation is that the Bush administration will not make significant changes in its Taiwan policy, it is currently reviewing its position on cross-strait issues. While not a formal policy review, it represents a significant effort to reconsider current US policies. Specialists feel that the US will try to encourage cross-strait dialogue, but will certainly not directly involve itself in any talks. Bonnie Glaser of the Center for Strategic and International Studies commented about the administration that, “It is clear that they are going to think very seriously whether they have to play a more active, involved role than they have in the past.” Another source of change in policy may come from a change in principals. Because Colin Powell and Richard Armitage are not expected to serve another four years, Bush might appoint China hawks in their place. John Tkacik of American Heritage noted that the Bush team in its second term would, “review the situation where the United States has to confront a growing desire on the part of the Chinese to expend their sphere of influence. I think in the end we will run up against a confrontation on that issue.” In other words, the traditional conservative antipathy toward China might become more pronounced in a State Department without Colin Powell.
Taiwanese government officials claim to be very pleased with Bush’s victory. Tsai Huang-liang, the whip of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party said that because Bush plans to contain China, the US must rely on Taiwan. Yet a spokesperson for the Nationalist Party said that Bush had created a “red-line” Taiwan could not cross, signifying an increase in pressure. Another opposition candidate from the People First Party claimed that the US was slanting toward China, as could be seen through Colin Powell’s recent comments in Beijing. Many analysts subscribe to this view, who see Powell’s comments as a way for the Bush administration to set a parameter from what it will accept from Taiwan.

-Court Rejects Bid to Nullify Presidential Election

Wu Ching-Yuan, presiding judge of the Taiwan High Court, ruled that the March 19 Presidential Election should not be nullified because of voting irregularities. The judge said that the plaintiff, former Nationalist presidential candidate Lien Chan, was not able to provide direct evidence of voting irregularities. Lien’s attorney said that because the court was controlled by supporters of Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian, Lien would appeal to a higher court. Lien had claimed that the assassination attempt on March 19 that injured Chen was a farce to obtain sympathy votes, and that a mobilization of security organizations illegally prevented large numbers of people from getting to the polls. Protestors at the court became violent soon after the ruling.
Members of Chen’s Democratic Progressive Party are excited about the influence of the court decision on the upcoming December elections. Despite the court decision, Lien has still refused to concede the election despite the fact that it took place in March. The DPP is planning a campaign theme of "teaching Lien and Soong a democracy lesson with votes." Premier Yu Shyi-kun has even said that Lien and his vice presidential candidate James Soong’s refusal to acknowledge the election would go down in Taiwanese history as the “Lien-Soong rebellion.” Many independent analysts agree, as they suspect that refusing to concede may push away moderate voters from the Nationalists. Yet some analysts feel that the court decision may create sympathy votes for the Nationalists.

-New Poll Numbers

Some new poll numbers from Taiwan:

Is Taiwan a sovereign nation?
Yes: 70%
No: 14.5
Don’t know: 10

Bush reelection helpful for Taiwan?
Yes: 54.3%
No: 21

In favor of normalizing ties with US:
Yes: 88%
No: 2%

Would the US sacrifice Taiwan to pursue cooperation with China?
Yes, definitely: 12%
Possibly: 30
Not happen: 29
Definitely not happen: 10

What party is best equipped to protect Taiwan?
Democratic Progressive Party: 27.9
Nationalists: 13.3
Taiwan Solidarity Union: 1.7
People First Party.

-Arms Purchase Delayed Until After December Election

Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian’s administration tried one last time to place the special weapons package on the legislative agenda before the December election, but was blocked by opposition in the legislature. The weapons package includes $18US billion worth of American weapons, including, “six Patriot-III anti-missile batteries, eight diesel electric submarines and a squadron of 12 anti-submarine aircraft.” This means that there will be no vote on the package until after the December 11 elections. Chen’s Democratic Progressive Party claimed that the opposition was weak on Taiwan’s national security, while the pan-blue (Nationalists and People First Party) state that the money would be better spent on social issues, and that the weapons would needlessly provoke China while not seriously improving Taiwan’s defense capabilities.
The Democracy Action Alliance, an anti-arms purchase group hunger-striking outside the legislature building, cheered the news by throwing gloves with anti-weapons slogans. Although this group is not connected to any political party, they tried to pressure the legislature into not discussing the arms bill. These individuals also support a European Union type solution to the cross-strait problem. According to them, this plan would allow Taiwan to save money by not purchasing the American weapons. The DAA and pan-blue camp also criticized the government for trying to simultaneously pass a law that would make it legal for the weapons purchase fall outside of the normal budget, while at the same time trying to pass the arms budget.
Senior American officials have recently stated that if the Taiwanese failed to pass the weapons package bill swiftly, it would jeopardize US-Taiwanese military cooperation and send a wrong signal to China. Many military analysts feel that Taiwan must be able to withstand a Chinese attack for two weeks so that the US would have time to send reinforcements to the Taiwan Straits. These weapons would be a key component to a successful, albeit temporary, defense of Taiwan.

Klaatu, barada, nikto!!

2004-11-03T08:00:00.000-08:00

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, November 3 2004

A. More Fallout on Powell’s Comments on Taiwan

B. Arms Sale Delayed

C. New Proposal on Cross-Trait Relations

-More Fallout on Powell’s Comments on Taiwan

When Secretary of State Colin Powell was in China a week ago, he made comments about cross-strait relations that were far more explicit than those previously made by a US official. It caused a firestorm in Taiwan across the political spectrum, and has had serious repercussions on the likelihood of the arms purchase being approved in the near future(see below). The most controversial of Powell’s comments in Beijing was, “Taiwan is not independent. It does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation, and that remains our policy, our firm policy.” Powell continued to say that he hoped for “peaceful reunification” of Taiwan and the PRC, something which only 4% of Taiwanese hope for in the immediate future.
The US has since tried to play down Powell’s comments, but there has neither been a categorical denial nor a complete restatement of policy. The State Department says Powell meant to say “resolution” instead of reunification, and Powell himself in an interview with CNBC said that the US’ goal, “is really to have a peaceful resolution to the problem.” The director of the American Institute in Taiwan, Douglas Paal, met with the Taiwanese Foreign Minister Mark Chen after Chen demanded an explanation of Powell’s comments. Paal answered by saying that US policy had remained unchanged, and that Powell had defended Taipei during talks in Beijing by supporting Taiwan’s full entrance into the WHO and APEC, as well as speaking in support of US arms sales to Taiwan.
These steps have not been very successful in soothing Taiwanese feelings, especially since Taiwanese elections are fast approaching and all parties are trying to use Powell’s comments to their advantage. Both parties believe that Taiwan is independent, but their positions differ in what that means. The Kuomintang believe Taiwan is a truncated version of the government created in 1912 meant for all of China, while the ruling Democratic Progressive Party believes Taiwan is its own independent country with no links to China. KMT spokesperson Chang Jung-kung said of Powell’s interview, “Powell did not actually say himself that he misspoke nor did he retract his earlier remarks. I don’t see how this interview makes any difference.” Some of those on the opposite side of the political spectrum, whose position is that Taiwan should officially change its name from the Republic of China to Taiwan and change its constitution to make the change official, went to the American Institute in Taiwan to protest. They burned a Chinese flag over a model of the Statue of Liberty and chanted anti-US slogans before police removed them. In sum, it is clear that Powell’s comments did not go over well in Taiwan.
Analysts have differed over why Powell made the comments. Some say that this was a slip of the tongue, while others say that it was an attempt to be tough on Taiwan because it was making noises about independence, while at the same time greasing talks with Beijing. In any case, two things are clear. If Powell did make a slip of the tongue, the retractions may not matter. Zhang Mingqing, a spokesperson for the Chinese government said, “Some people have said Powell has made a slip of the tong, but I don’t believe it.” The Chinese also say that Bush was returning to consistency with these comments after catering to Taiwan. The US may be afraid to restate policy to fix the problem, but that would cause Powell to lose face. The other result is that it has angered many Taiwanese and possibly delayed the arms purchase.

-Taiwanese Arms Purchase

Because of opposition in the Taiwanese legislature, there will be no vote on the American weapons purchase before December 12 elections. The opposition Kuomintang party claims that the money would be better spent on education and social issues, and, incensed by Powell’s comments on Taiwan, were successful in blocking the issue from being set on the pre-election agenda. This may cause Taiwanese-American relations to deteriorate, as American officials feel that Taiwan should be able to defend itself in the case of a Chinese invasion until the US could arrive in force to help defend Taiwan. The US also sees the purchase as an indication of Taiwanese commitment to defense ties. However, many Taiwanese believe that since the US would defend Taiwan in any case, the weapons are a waste of money. Moreover, some are convinced that the weapons purchase would lead to increased tensions in the strait. On the other hand, military analysts in both the US and Taiwan believe that unless Taiwan quickly improves its defenses, China will soon possess (or already possesses) the ability to execute a decapitation strike against Taiwan before the US could react. The arms purchase includes PAC-3 missiles, eight diesel submarines, and submarine hunting aircraft.

-New Proposal on Cross-Strait Relations

The author of this report recently attended a conference on Chinese democracy that was sponsored by several US and Taiwanese think tanks. The author’s professor Kenneth Lieberthal, Bill Clinton’s former Director for Asian Affairs at the National Security Council, was interviewed by the press at this conference about cross-strait relations. He described a recent proposal that deserves mentioning in this report as it was picked up not only by several Taiwaneses news sources, but Western news sources as well. The basic idea of Lieberthal’s proposal is that the current goals of Taiwan and China are totally incompatible. This means that since talks are likely to lead to more frustration due to the inability to reach a final solution, an interim solution is required. This interim solution could last as long as fifty years, after which talks regarding a final solution would resume. During the interim, China would promise not to invade Taiwan, and Taiwan would ensure the mainland that it would take no steps to formalize separation and independence from the mainland. During this time, the rest of the world could take steps that would guarantee that the other side would stick to its agreements. For example, the US would guarantee Taiwan’s security, while threatening to cut all relations with Taiwan should it declare independence. This proposal assumes that as China becomes more economically advanced and possibly even more democratic, it might be more inconceivable for military action to be required.

Klingons: The Intergalactic Standard for Manliness

2004-10-27T06:24:00.000-07:00

Anyone out there???

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, October 27 2004

A. Powell’s Trip to China

B. Taiwanese Response to Powell Trip

C. Political Scandal Regarding International Donations

-Powell’s Trip to China

US Secretary of State Colin Powell recently traveled to Beijing to discuss with his Chinese counterparts the situation in the Taiwan Strait, the human rights situation in China, North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, and a number of other topics. Unfortunately, he was entirely unsuccessful on the Taiwanese question. The US delegation tried to persuade the Chinese government to recognize Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian’s National Day Speech as conciliatory and to move towards a cross-strait dialogue. In his speech, Chen had subtly made a reference to an alleged agreement between Taiwan and the mainland reached in Hong Kong a decade ago, in which the basis for negotiations lay on each side adhering to a “One China” principle, but maintaining separate interpretations of what this meant. However, according to one senior US diplomat, the Chinese were “uniformly downbeat” about Taiwan and possibilities for talks. Powell remarked to the press that the Chinese leadership was, “still concerned about President Chen Shui-bian’s actions and they did not find is statement that forthcoming,” while Chinese paramount leader Hu Jintao responded, “The Taiwan independence forces' activities aiming at splitting the country remain the root of the cross-straits tension and the greatest threat to peace and stability in the region.” In sum, nothing moved on this front.
Another point worth noting about Powell’s trip was that he spoke in harsher terms than ever before about Taiwanese independence. In Beijing, Powell affirmed that Taiwan was not independent and simply a part of China. In an interview with the Far Eastern Review, Powell said, “In response to certain churnings about independence, we made it very, very clear that we do not support independence.”The Taiwanese government was angered and surprised by these comments. Although Powell’s words were not technically a change in policy, his statement about Taiwan not existing as a nation were stronger words than used before. US officials normally say they simply hope for a peaceful solution to the crisis. Furthermore, the Taiwanese government was not informed of what Powell would say to his Chinese counterparts before reading about it in the news(see below for political repercussions).
Powell used these strong words for three reasons. The US felt it necessary to retaliate for the Taiwanese government’s failure to inform the US about Chen’s decision to change the Taiwanese constitution before he mentioned his plans in a speech. The second reason is that Powell felt it important to make sure the Taiwanese understood that American support for Taiwan was not guaranteed, implying that Taiwan should purchase the weapons deal currently in discussion in the Parliament to show good faith. Finally, by using such harsh words against Taiwan, Powell was trying to play down PRC worries about US meddling in the region and to quell complaints about the military deal.

-Taiwanese Response to Powell’s Trip

Secretary of State Colin Powell’s remarks about Taiwan not being a sovereign state have caused an anti-US political firestorm in Taipei, even leading to a food-fight in a committee in the Taiwanese parliament. Foreign Minister Mark Chen said that although some foreign ministry officials were briefed about Powell’s trip to China, it was not in great detail. Chen said that Powell’s words “breached mutual trust” and were a complete “surprise.” Chen continued, saying, “The US has told us not to give them surprises, but this time it is the US giving us a surprise. This is unfair.”
President Chen Shui-bian and Premier Yu Shyi-kun in response to Powell quickly made statements about Taiwan clearly being a sovereign nation with no connection to the PRC. When Foreign Minister Chen was questioned in the Parliament about Powell’s words, he said he was not entirely sure whether the US position on Taiwan had changed. FM Chen said he asked Taiwan’s representative in the US to formally enquire about US policy. State Department Spokesperson Adam Ereli said that no change in policy had taken place, but that Powell had only made “an objective statement.” Chen said that the US State Department has said that Powell meant to say “resolution” instead of “reunification” as the goal to resolve the cross-strait tensions.
The situation in the Taiwanese parliament was at times chaotic. Kuomintang lawmakers chanted, “Powell doesn’t love Taiwan” and “We are not intimidated.” The KMT and People First Party said that if the US did not recognize Taiwan as sovereign, then Taiwan should consequently not buy the US weapons package. KMT lawmakers accused Democratic Progresssive Party member Cheng Tsung-yi (the DPP supports the weapons purchase) of lacking testicles in a committee discussing the US weapons, and KMT lawmaker Chu Feng-Chih lost his patience and threw lunchboxes and books at the DPP, who responded in kind. Tsai Huang-liang, the DPP whip, ordered his party to leave the room to protest the KMT’s refusal to discuss the weapons bill, and the session ended in chaos. Tsai, despite supporting the weapons package and in favor of strong US-Taiwan ties, said that it seemed that Powell was “ignorant of the facts,” showing that anger at the US was across the political spectrum. Both parties are trying to use Powell’s words to their political advantage. The KMT and PFP (known as pan-blue) say Powell’s words show that President Chen’s steps toward formal independence were backfiring, while also criticizing the US as being a bully. At the same time, pro-independence parties say that Powell’s words could only be expected, since Taiwan has not declared independence or formerly changed its name from the Republic of China.

-Taiwanese Political Scandal

Other than Secretary of State Colin Powell’s trip to China, the biggest story in Taiwanese politics this week has been President Chen’s alleged illegal political donations to South American countries, and Chen’s lawsuits against the accusing individuals. Two People First Party politicians, Liu Wen-hsiung and Tsay Chung-han, as well as a television talk show host, Jaw Shau-kong, accused Chen of giving a million dollar birthday gift to Ex-Panamanian President Mireya Moscoso. The money was allegedly intended to quite Moscoso about Chen’s sexual advances (in Taiwanese, “eat her tofu”) and to ensure continued Panamian support for Taiwanese policies.
Because the accusations were so outrageous, they made front page headlines in many Taiwanese newspapers. The situation was exacerbated by Moscoso’s threatening to sue the PFP members for libel, and Chen himself also threatened a lawsuit. The offenders ultimately partially apologized, but said that slush funds do exist with the intent of waging “dollar diplomacy,” a term that refers to Taiwan giving money to governments so that they continue to recognize Taiwan instead of the mainland. The accusations would not have received so much attention if this was not such a sensitive topic in Taiwanese politics. Being forced to give money for international recognition is seen as an act that causes Taiwan to lose face, but some feel it is a dirty need necessary for Taiwan to compete with the PRC. Articles about Taiwan being betrayed by another country despite monetary donations, or a former friend blackmailing Taiwan, appear regularly in the news and contribute to the sense of frustration.

Second Report

2004-10-20T07:27:00.000-07:00

I have attached websites as hyperlinks in the Microsoft Word copy of my reports, but they do not show up on blogspot. If you are curious about the origin of a piece of information, please leave a comment with your email and I will get back to you. Actually, if ANYONE out there is reading this other than Eric please let me know and it will make me happy. :)

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, October 20 2004

A. Ethnic Tensions
1. Examination Controversy
2. Ethnic and Cultural Development Conference

B. Concern over Nuclear Program

C. New Poll Numbers

C. US-Taiwanese Relations
1. Carly Fiorina Declines to Act as Go-Between
2. Issue of Bad Communication
3. Powell’s Trip to Beijing

D. Taiwan in US Politics

-Ethnic Tensions

Some members of the Examination Yuan, a governmental organization that designs and evaluates tests for students and government employees, want to exclude China from the topic of “National History and Geography.” Yet Examination Minister Lin Chia-Cheng says that because of an earlier plenary decision, individual committee members cannot change the law immediately, so the plenary committee plans on reconsidering its policies to solve the problem. There is a chance that the current chief of the Examination Yuan may be replaced by an individual more in favor of Taiwanese-centered tests because of slow movement in the direction of removing China. Another proposal from the Ministry of Education wants stresses Taiwanese history in high schools, with the first semester for high school seniors focusing on Taiwan, and the second semester concentrating on China along with the rest of the world. The government also would like to start supporting local dialects such as Taiwanese(Hoklo) and Hokkienese at the expense of Mandarin. The priority would first be placed on dialects, followed by Mandarin and then English. MOE officials have described a high demand for English as “unhealthy” because it is learned at the expense of local dialects.
The rationale behind these steps lies in an attempt by the Taiwanese government to assert an identity that is distinct from the mainland to create more of a basis for independence, but this is also creating problems between the mainlanders that arrived in 1949 after fleeing from the Communists and the Hoklo and Hakkienese, who have lived in China for centuries and whose culture and languages were suppressed by the KMT.
By not including China in tests on “National” history and geography, the government is implying that Taiwan is a separate entity from the mainland. Also, the government fears that locals dialects are slowly disappearing because of the stress on English and Mandarin. More Hakka (an ethnic group in Taiwan) speak Mandarin in their homes than their own dialect of Hakkienese. By once again stressing these languages, the government is showing the existence of a different cultural tradition than China’s.
A recent, important conference discussing ethnic reconciliation touched on this issue of language. At the Ethnic and Cultural Developmental Conference, a Hakka representative called for aboriginal, Hakkienese, and Hoklo languages to all be considered “Taiwanese,” instead of just Hoklo, the predominant local dialect. His point hints at problems among ethnic groups in Taiwan about what it means to be Taiwanese.
There was a lack of agreement at the conference as to the seriousness of the ethnic tensions between mainlanders, Hakka, Hoklo and aboriginals. Stephane Corcuff of Harvard said, “If Taiwan wants to keep its ability to preserve civil peace in a future that will probably be more tense, it must start right now to imagine a mode of national identification based on citizen’s consciousness and to invent a new culture of national allegiance.” He stressed the difficulty of a country with different, competing perceptions of what it means to be patriotic based on a perception of personal ethnic background. This stemmed from several decades of KMT enforcement of Mandarin and emphasis on Chinese culture. Yet others were more sanguine, believing that an ethnic divide was exaggerated. In any case, there was only a single member of the conference who supported unification with the mainland, and he was subjected to yells from the audience during his speech. At the same time, another central point of the conference was that to move forward, that there had to be a moving past the mistrust between mainlanders and other Taiwanese stemming from the KMT dictatorship, and that more respect for different cultures is needed if Taiwan is to become a united country.

-Taiwanese Nuclear Program?

Three recent events have raised suspicions among Taiwanese and American academics about the possibility of a secret nuclear weapons program. Several months ago, the Taipei Times, an important Taiwanese newspaper, wrote in an editorial about procuring nuclear weapons, “The ability to obliterate China’s ten largest cities and the Three Gorges Dam would be a powerful deterrent to Chinese adventurism.” Because of this paper’s ties to the Democratic Progressive Party, the party of President Chen Shui-bian, some became suspicious that this might have been written by a government official. After this article appeared, Nelson Ku of the opposition People First Party asked the Taiwanese premier, “Is there a five-person team, including active and past members from the current administration, planning the development of nuclear weapons?” The premier denied the claim, but its specificity seems to indicate that Ku might have had some access to secret information. Thirdly, diplomats from the International Atomic Energy Agency said they have obtained new evidence that Taiwan had a secret plutonium separation project in the 1980s, putting even more attention on the possibility of a nuclear weapons program.
David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security said of the issue, “There is a growing concern in US circles that Taiwan may be doing nuclear weapon planning now or thinking about it, particularly after the comment in the Taiwanese Parliament.” The State Department, when asked directly about the issue, said that Washington would leave it up to the IAEA to decide what was going on. Hang Suey-Sheng, a military official, said of the allegations, “We have made it clear that we will never develop, use or store nuclear weapons or related items.”
The United States has in the past stopped Taiwanese attempts to build a nuclear weapon, and has said it would not support Taiwan against the mainland should it develop such a weapon. It has used this in the past as a way to convince China to work against North Korean nuclear programs as a quid pro quo.

-New Poll Numbers

A new survey has released some important new poll numbers that will certainly influence Taiwanese politics. For all the numbers, please use the hyperlink to access the website. Below are some important points:

-Upcoming Elections:
Democratic Progressive Party: 24.46%
Kuomintang: 14.57
Undecided: 44.03

-40% said KMT must disassociate itself with unification policies if it wants to win presidential election in 2008.

-Ethnic Identity:
Taiwanese: 62.2%
Chinese and Taiwanese: 18.6
Chinese: 14.4

Issue of Independence:
Support Status Quo:62.6%
Independence Immediately:17.2
Unification Immediately: 5.4

44.8% of Taiwanese said President Chen was sincere in National Day Speech, while 30% said he was not.

-US-Taiwanese Relations

President Chen Shui-bian asked HP Chairwoman and CEO Carly Fiorina to act as a go-between for Taiwan to persuade China to open direct air links and agree to bilateral dialogue. He urged her to “express to Beijing and lobby for the support of the US in accordance with this principle.” Fiorina was nonplussed, and her company released a report saying, “The purpose of Fiorina’s visit in Taiwan is to meet with customers and she believes businesses should stick to business and leave politics to politicians.

Two former chairs of the American Institute in Taiwan have raised the issue of bad communication between Taiwan and the United States. The American Institute in Taiwan is the US government’s non-official representation in Taiwan, and State Department officials must go on leave for a period of time to work there. Therese Shaheen and Richard Bush, the two chairs, said that Taiwan had on numerous occasions not informed the US about important policy announcements. Most significantly, Taiwan did not give the US a heads up about releasing plans to introduce a new constitution. They said that future problems like this might cause serious friction in the relationship.

Secretary of State Colin Powell will soon make a trip to Beijing to promote President Chen Shui-bian’s call for cross-strait dialogue and to discuss the American position regarding arms sales to Taiwan. Although Richard Boucher, State Department spokesperson, said that the US did not agree with Chen’s National Holiday Speech in its entirety, he agreed with the spirit of it, and called it constructive.

-Taiwan in US Politics

Senator John Kerry and President Bush have avoided Taiwan throughout the entire presidential campaign, so it has been difficult to determine whether or not they would have significantly different policies toward the island. Different analysts have reached different conclusions. Alan Romberg of the Henry L. Stimson Center says of the issue, “Obviously, there will be differences.” Yet John Tkacik of the Heritage Foundation says that he finds the differences, “quite stark” and that Bush was “far clearer and firm.”
During the primaries, Kerry said that he supported a “one-country, two-systems” solution to the Taiwan question, which is a departure from current policy, which does not go quite that far. The party platforms do not make the question any easier. The Democratic platform simply says it wants the final solution to be , consistent with the wishes and best interest of the Taiwanese people. The Republican platform states, “America will help Taiwan defend itself.”
Senator Joe Biden of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee also recently broached the subject during a meeting with the Council on Foreign Relations. He described Kerry’s position as, “the same policy as the last seven presidents: studied ambiguity. He also claims to have received a call from Colin Powell saying, The president just accidentally changed our policy on Taiwan, after Bush said that he would do whatever it took to defend the island. Bush has recently, “been trying to put the issue back in the box,” according to Biden.

Taiwanese Think Tanks

2004-10-15T23:06:00.000-07:00

Taiwanese Research Institutions:
Possibilities for Cooperation

Introduction:

Should the Center for American Progress decide to pursue a cooperative relationship with a research organization in Taiwan, it is clear that there is no shortage of opportunities. Taiwan is home to a large number of think tanks of various affiliations, scopes, and interests, many of which also have a history of working with other research centers throughout the world.
Most think tanks in Taiwan have political or university affiliations. Think tanks with political affiliations generally profess to be independent and impartial, but receive the majority of their funding from political parties. So, unlike many American think tanks with clear ideological leanings but without strong structural ties with political parties, politically affiliated Taiwanese think tanks are much more closely with their political counterparts. This type of think tank exists on both sides of the political spectrum, and also have a history of pursuing relationships with research institutions in other countries.
Having said this, it would be helpful to discuss the general expert and common consensus toward progressive political politics in the United States and why it would be in the Center’s interest to pursue relationships with Taiwanese counterparts. Many Taiwanese experts feel more comfortable with Republican presidents than Democrats because they feel that the Republican position is more clear. Lo Chih-Cheng, Director of the Institute for National Policy Research, said, “If John Kerry wins the election, we don’t know what kind of policy preference the Democrats may have. We don’t know what kind of security team they are going to have.” He also commented that he felt that most Taiwanese think that China wanted Kerry to win the election because he would be softer on the Taiwanese issue.
Although all American presidents have subscribed to the “One China” principle, many Taiwanese see a difference in degree of support. Bill Clinton was less supportive of Taiwan’s entrance into the World Trade Organization than George W. Bush has been. Lin Wen Cheng of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy said that he doubted Kerry would be beneficial to Taiwan because of Clinton’s previous “three noes” policy, those being not supporting Taiwan independence, not acknowledging Taiwanese independence, and not supporting Taiwan’s entrance into international organizations. Deputy Professor Chiu Kun-Hsuan of the ChengChi University’s Asia Research Institute said the Democratic policy was too vague, and that Rand Beers and Richard Holbrooke were antagonistic toward Taiwan. He believes that most Taiwanese are hoping for a Republican victory in November.
Yet many academics and researchers, especially those sympathetic to the Taiwanese President’s Democratic Progressive Party, feel ambivalent about the Democrats. They feel that on issues of values such as human rights the DPP has more in come with the Democrats than the Republicans. If the Center was able to use this sentiment and convey to Taiwan greater faith in American progressive politics’ commitment to the island, it would be able create better cooperation between Taiwan and the United States in the future. In any case, it seems important that a proper progressive policy toward Taiwan be developed as soon as possible.
University-affiliated universities are well respected in Taiwan, and are totally funded by the university. They occasionally brief government officials and are generally impartial. This type of organization highly focused on pursuing relationships with overseas partners and usually have the largest staffs and most comprehensive resources. Private think tanks are also becoming more popular but are usually not as large as their political or university-affiliated counterparts.
The Center may wish to consider using a previous relationship between the Brookings Institution and the Institute for National Policy Research as a model. These two organizations worked together to conduct a conference in Washington that consisted of several panels including both Taiwanese and American scholars. Please see the link for more information.

Summary of Possible Partners:

Chung Hua Institution for Economic Research

This organization describes itself as a non-profit/autonomous research organ, but because it is heavily subsidized by the government it is more like a semi-governmental institution. It has 45 people in research, 24 research fellows, and 5 research assistance. One of it’s stated goals is to, “play an important role in strengthening economic ties between the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the rest of the world, through the sponsorship of international conference and by forging links with individual scholars and research organizations.” The Chung Hua Institution for Economic Research already cooperates with Harvard, the London School of Economics, and the American Enterprise Institute. The Center for American Progress may want to look into this Institution because it is relatively independent and has a history of cooperation with other organizations, but its focus on economics may limit the scope of scholarly dialogue.

Institute of International Relations at ChengChi University

The Institute of International Relations began as a private organization in 1953 known as the Association of International Relations. It took its current title in 1961 and “began to expand and develop contacts and exchange relations with other academic institutions at home and overseas.” In 1975 it became affiliated with ChengChi University, a school known in Taiwan for its emphasis on Political Science and International Relations, and is completely funded by university funds. It runs the Sino-American Conference annually, alternating between Taipei and Washington. The conference invites scholars from both Taiwan and the United States to come together to discuss current issues facing Taiwan-US relations. It also publishes a journal named the America and Europe Monthly to inform Taiwanese citizens about the outside world.
The Institute has a special department known as the Cooperation and Exchange Section that specializes in creating new relationships with other institutions, and it already has achieved seventeen formal academic exchange agreements. Some connections include the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for Chinese Studies at the University of Michigan, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Heritage foundation, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, and a number of other universities besides Michigan. Clearly, if the Center for American Progress wished to find a good partner with which to exchange, this would be a viable option. The only possible drawback would be the fact that the Institute already has so many outside relationships.
Institute for National Policy Research

Created in 1989 by the Chang Yung-Fa Foundation shortly after martial law was lifted, the Institute for National Policy Research is the first non-partisan think tank in Taiwan and continues to be entirely privately funded. It has a wide scope and researches multiple issues, both domestic and international. As mentioned above in the introduction, the Institute already cooperates with outside parties, such as the Brookings Institution, the National Endowment for Democracy, and many others. Although not as large as the Institute of International Relations, the Institute for National Policy Research would make another good partner.

National Policy Foundation

Receiving 75% of its funding from the Kuomintang political party, the National Policy Foundation is clearly partisan. It was created shortly after the KMT first lost power in 2000, and it has amongst its ranks many academics and former government officials, including KMT party chairman Lien Chan, who sits on its board. It has a staff of over 150 with 500 assistants, and claims to produce more material than any other think tank in Southeast Asia. It is clearly a strong force in the Taiwanese political dialogue. Although there is no definite reason that the Center for American Progress should not pursue a relationship with the National Policy Foundation, its partisan nature may make it a less suitable candidate.

Taiwan Research Institute

On the opposite side of the political spectrum from the National Policy Foundation lies the Taiwan Research Institute. Described as a “do-tank” by former Taiwanese President and current honorary chairman of the Institute, Lee Teng-Hui, its objective is to bring Taiwan politically closer to the views of Mr. Lee. He is also a leading member of the Taiwan Solidarity Union, which advocates Taiwanese independence from the mainland immediately. The Institute has also been racked by scandal when one if its leaders was accused of embezzlement and money laundering. Because of the intent of this organization and problems it has had, this may not be a good choice for the Center.

Taiwan Foundation for Democracy

The Taiwan Foundation for Democracy was created quite recently with the assistance of the National Endowment for Democracy. Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian sent a message to the World Movement for Democracy in November, 2000 in Brazil to say that he wanted to create an institution to promote democracy throughout Asia and this foundation was the result. Its one year anniversary celebration brought a large number of people from the government, including Mr. Chen and his foreign minister. It seems to be almost a pet project of the president. This organization is also interested in making contacts with other organizations, but because it is fairly new it has not progressed very far in this respect. The Taiwan Foundation for Democracy is another viable option for the Center for American Progress.

Conclusion:

The organizations above represent a wide assortment of options for the Center. They differ widely in their affiliations, and they range from fairly established organizations to newer ones still searching for contacts. Because of a long history of contacts between American and Taiwanese organizations and continuing interest in developing more such cooperation, it would not be difficult for the Center to begin looking into this possibility. If any questions arise from this report, please contact Joseph Torigian at jptori@umich.edu.

Following Formosa

2004-10-14T05:51:00.000-07:00

Hi,

As an intern with a think tank, one of my jobs is to send reports to Washington about Taiwanese politics and Taiwanese relations with China and the US. I'm going to post them here for anyone who is interested. I'd be interested in getting comments from people. The first one is posted below. **Now proofread!**

Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, October 14 2004

A. Topic of Interest-
Chen Shui Bian’s National Day Speech: Analysis and Reactions

B. Domestic Politics
1. Kuomintang’s Prospects Looking Grim in December Vote
2. More Controversy over March 19 Shooting
3. US Arms Purchase Creating Political Turmoil

C. Relations with China
1. Taiwanese-Chinese Direct Flights?

D. International Relations
1. Trouble with Singapore
2. Extortion from Chad?

-National Day Speech
Taiwanese President Chen Shui-Bian’s National Day Speech on October 10th conveyed a mixed message that seemed to be open to interpretation, a technique that may have been intended to allow for future flexibility in negotiations while appeasing political allies. President Chen describes his speech as an olive branch to China, and the clearest sign of this lies in his identifying discussions in Hong Kong as a model for future negotiations. The 1992 discussions in Hong Kong centered on practical issues of mutual concern to both China and Taiwan, and this type of bilateral talk lasted until 1999 when President Lee Teng-Hui characterized the talks as state-to-state, thus causing the Chinese to break off the negotiations. A “Hong Kong Consensus” has also been ascribed to these talks, meaning that both sides agreed to subscribe to the “One China Policy,” but could have their own interpretation of what this meant. A number of President Chen’s own political allies were worried that Chen was quietly signaling to the Chinese that he was willing to accept their precondition for more talks, that being that Taiwan agree that there is but one China. However, Joseph Wu, the point man in Taiwan on cross-strait relations, has denied that there ever was a HK Consensus. He says that Chen only mentioned the Hong Kong meetings to show that he was interested in talking about practical matters. Yet it is less clear whether President Chen was indeed hinting at the HK Consensus in order to spark some sort of a breakthrough in relations.
The second notable part of the speech, and the most antagonizing part to China, was Chen saying that Taiwan was the Republic of China, and the Republic of China was Taiwan. Although this seems to be clearly the case, there are implications for cross-strait relations. The Republic of China’s history stems from the 1911 revolution on the mainland that led to the collapse of the Qing Emperors, and after Chiang Kai-Shek fled to Taiwan taking this political system with him, Taiwan continues to use the same constitution despite the fact that it is still designed to incorporate all of mainland China’s provinces (including the now sovereign state of Mongolia, which now not even the PRC claims). If, as President Chen says, the Republic of China is simply Taiwan, then it no longer technically has historical or political relations with the mainland.
The speech drew criticism from the majority of the Taiwanese press, politicians from both sides of the political spectrum, and a particularly nasty retort from the PRC. Taiwan’s former President Lee Teng Hui, who now claims to have worked secretly for independence while in office and currently supports the Taiwan Solidarity Union, lambasted the speech as a concession and demanded the creation of a new constitution to formalize independence. President Chen’s fellow Democratic Progressive Party member Lin Cho-Shui said it was simply a measure to please the US. Lien Chan, President Chen’s Kuomintang opponent in the 2004 election, said that President Chen was just bowing to political pressure and did nothing to further relations with China. Another DPP member praised the speech, however, noting that drawing criticisms from both Lee and Lien, with radically different political views, could only show that he was doing something right.
The United Daily News, an important Taiwanese newspaper, borrowed a word from the American political lexicon to label President Chen a flip-flopper for mentioning the HK meetings. The China Times Express said his speech was simply “empty words,” but the China Times praised the speech for being “fuzzy” and said the ambiguity would be helpful for making accomplishments in the future.
The US said that the speech was helpful, but a Chinese spokesperson claimed that President Chen’s behavior was totally irresponsible, and that his remarks, “wantonly seek to create countries on each side of the Taiwan Strait.” Premier Yu Shyi-Kun later followed up President Chen’s speech by saying that Taiwan would meet with China at any time without any preconditions, and would even be willing to discuss the “One China” issue. However, it does not seem like any major breakthrough could occur in the near future.

-December Election Prospects
The failure of the Kuomintang and People First political parties to combine before the December elections portends a likely loss of a majority in the Parliament. The Kuomintang’s Lien Chan and People First’s James Song (known together as the pan-blue)worked together during the last presidential election in an effort to defeat President Chen Shui-Bian (leader of the pan-green coalition of Democratic Progressive Party and Taiwan Solidarity Union). After losing by only 30,000 votes following a controversial assassination attempt against President Chen, the pan-blue political alliance is now in tatters.
This failure to unite, as well as a large number of independent candidates who analysts say will more likely draw votes from the KMT than the DPP, could put President Chen for the first time in charge of the Parliament. He will then be in a stronger position to push for military purchases from the United States, but it will also be easier for him to push for changes to the Constitution that the KMT and PFP oppose. The importance to both political parties of controlling the Parliament is very clear, as all four major parties are fielding political heavyweights. Yet despite the intensity of the last election and the fact that control of the Parliament is up for grabs, it seems likely that the vote turnout will be much lower because of disillusionment with the political process.

-March 19th Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee
While the country still awaits the judicial branch of the Taiwanese government to rule on whether or not to annul the March 2004 election results, the March 19th Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee is now under attack because of its alleged political nature and widespread powers of investigation. One of its members, Yeh Yao-Peng, has already said that he thinks President Chen Shui-Bian faked the shooting in order to create sympathy votes to win the election. A recent poll conducted by President Chen’s Democratic Progressive Party says that 91% of the electorate believe that the Committee is flawed, and even 31% of the opposition believe that it has problems.
DPP lawmakers have accused the Committee of having powers not suitable in a democracy, with President Chen going so far as to say that these unchecked powers “infringe upon human rights and the judiciary.”

-US Arms Purchase
Possibly the most intense debate in Taiwanese politics today has to do with the issue of buying American weapons. The package would include eight diesel subs, several PAC anti-missile systems, and P3C sub-hunting planes at a cost of over $18 billion. The issue sparked physical confrontations in the Parliament, heated exchanges, and sent thousands to the streets to protest. The Taiwanese military has attempted to push public opinion in favor of the purchase, but comments by the US have undermined their attempts.
Richard Lawless, an American State Department official, said that if Taiwan did not buy the weapons, it would cause “serious repercussions.” He commented that it would show, “the attitude of the legislature toward the national defense of Taiwan.” The US concern is that Taiwan be able to defend itself during the time needed for American support to arrive in the case of a Chinese decapitation strike. These comments caused several anti-US comments in the Parliament, and even Taiwan’s Defense Minister Lie Jie said that while he agreed with Lawless in principle, he said that his remarks were not helpful.
The military has used dancing groups, billboards, and television talks shows to persuade people to support the purchase, although polls indicate that a large number already do. However, a campaign slogan calling on Taiwanese to drink one less cup of bubble tea a week caused thousands of protestors against the purchase to clearly enjoy the popular Taiwanese drink while marching through Taipei.
It is unclear whether the Taiwanese Parliament will be able to pass the bill authorizing the purchase. Opposition leader James Song has said that he is not against the bill, but that he is unsure if Taiwan can afford it. Another opposition leader, Lien Chan, said to Premier Li Shyi-Kun, “Idiot, the problem doesn’t lie in the weapons systems,” prompting Li to comment “Idiot, the problem lies in your ass,” a reference to the fact the purchase was first approved in 1995 while Lien was premier. All told, it is unclear where the votes will fall but the DPP wants to vote before the December elections.

-Direct Flights
Despite charter flights between Taiwan and the mainland during the last New Year holiday, progress on more direct flights has stalled despite new attempts by Taiwan to break the impasse. The Chinese line is that all flights must be considered domestic flights, which is a non-starter for the Taiwanese who claim the Republic of China to be a sovereign nation. However, Beijing’s other principles of two-way flights, no stop midway, and the participation of both Chinese and Taiwanese airlines have been accepted by the Taiwanese. New meetings are also being conducted in Taiwan by government and prominent businessmen in an attempt to develop new ideas to promote these direct flights. Taiwanese now have to first pass through Hong Kong or another country before being able to enter the PRC, adding several hours to travel time.

-Trouble with Singapore
After Singapore’s Foreign Minister claimed at the United Nations that Taiwan’s steps toward independence were destabilizing East Asia, Taiwan’s Foreign Minister Mark Chen used a Hokkien (Taiwanese) expletive to say that Singapore was sucking up to China’s “balls” and that Singapore was no larger than a piece of mucous. After initially refusing to apologizing, Mark Chen finally expressed regret over the comments after it became clear that most Taiwanese thought the comment made Taiwan lose face. It has now become known as the “LP Incident,” with LP standing for the expletive in question.
The problems in the Singapore-Taiwan relationship started after Singaporean leader Lee Hsien-Loong traveled to Taiwan, prompting a rebuke from the mainland that has hardened the Singaporean line against Taiwanese independence

-Extortion from Chad?
A Taiwanese newspaper has claimed to have learned that Chad demanded more than $10 million in payment not to break relations with China. Chad continues to recognize Taipei and not Beijing. Although possibly not true, it is indicative of the international isolation Taiwan currently faces. Despite having one of the most advanced economies in the world, only about twenty countries recognize it as a sovereign nation, and most of these are poor countries dependent on Taiwan for foreign aid.