Taiwan

[American Patriot]

Taiwan must `go independent,' Chen tells FAPA dinner
Taipei Times ^ | 03-05-07 | staff



Taiwan needs to "go independent" and Taiwan was the best name for the country to use in seeking entry to the UN, President Chen Shui-bian said last night. "Taiwan will say yes to independence," he said. "Taiwan will be correctly named, Taiwan will have a new constitution, Taiwan will develop. There is no left-right political axis in Taiwan, just the question of independence or assimilation."


"The name `Taiwan' is the name of our mother," the president told a 25th anniversary dinner for Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) in Taipei. "[It's] the most beautiful, most powerful name; the best name for us to [use to] enter the United Nations."


"Taiwan needs a new constitution in order to become a normal, complete country," he said. "The continual existence of Taiwan is beneficial to the citizenry, Taiwanese businesspeople and democratic groups. We can only ensure cross-straits peacefulness by implementing democracy, fostering economic prosperity and taking care of the marginalized."


When reporters asked pan-blue officials to comment on Chen's speech, the response from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) was critical.


"Chen's speech was an attempt to suppress former president Lee Tung-hui's recent remarks that Taiwan is already independent," said Chang Jung-kung,executive director of the KMT's policy coordination department, at a separate event last night.


"It was also an attempt to provoke China when it comes to the issue of cross-straits relations," Chang said. "He is trying to use his `four yesses and one no' to make waves in Taiwanese politics and draw attention away from the corruption that occurred during his administration."
Chang said that China would not be so easily provoked and the US would step in to curb Chen if he goes too far.


(Excerpt) Read more at taipeitimes.com ...

[American Patriot]

China asks U.S. to stop Taiwan arms sales
imedinews ^ | 3/5/07 | imedinews



BEIJING, March 4 (UPI) — Chinese officials asked U.S. Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte, who was on an official visit to Beijing, to stop U.S. arms sales to Taiwan.


Negroponte met with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Dai Bingguo and Vice Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, Xinhua, the official government news agency, said. He reportedly pledged that the United States remains committed to a one-China policy.


During his Asian trip, Negroponte is also scheduled to visit South Korea and Japan. Xinhua reported that Negroponte will discuss North Korea's nuclear program during his visit.


The trip is Negroponte's first since being sworn in Tuesday. Copyright © 2007 by United Press International

[American Patriot]

China's hikes defence spend, puts US in a fix
economic times ^ | MARCH 05, 2007 | economic times

BEIJING: China on Sunday said it would hike its defence budget by a whopping 17.8% to nearly $45 billion this year, a move that will add to the unease of the US and its allies over Beijing’s ambitious military build-up.

China’s defence budget for 2007 is expected to hit 350.92 billion yuan ($44.94 billion), 17.8% higher than last year, Chinese parliamentary spokesman Jiang Enzhu told reporters ahead of the annual session of the National People’s Congress (NPC) starting on Monday. The figure marks an increase of 52.99 billion yuan ($6.79 billion) over last year. The budget proposal is expected to be passed by the NPC session in mid-March.

The extra money would be spent on boosting living allowances for the armed forces, training and upgrading military armaments, he said. “We must increase our military budget as it is important to national security,” Jiang said. This year’s defence budget accounts for 7.5% of the fiscal expenditure, compared to 7.7% in 2004, 7.3% in 2005 and 7.4% in 2006, he said.

But the spending spree by the world’s largest standing army has raised concern in the United States, Japan other nations. Moreover, western defence experts claim that China could be spending thrice the amount on its national defence than the publicly stated figure.

Last week, US vice-president Dick Cheney said China’s military build-up and the January 11 anti-satellite missile test were “not consistent” with the government’s stated goal of a ‘peaceful rise’, and demanded more transparency. But senior Chinese officials have rejected these concerns.

Chinese officials defend the increased defence spending, saying it was in line with the nation’s economic development and vast area and borders. China also says that it will never seek hegemony or plans to threaten any other country or provoke an arms race.

In the past, Chinese officials and experts have said China has to modernise its military which had the task to prevent Taiwan from declaring independence, possibly with US support.

During talks with visiting US official Negroponte, China has urged the US to cancel the proposed $421-million arms package deal with Taiwan, a self-ruled island which Beijing views as a rebel province that must be reunified with the mainland, even by force. The US, China says, should stop arms sales to Taiwan so as not to send “wrong” signals

[American Patriot]

Taiwan test-fires missile capable of attacking rival China
Asia World News ^ | Tue, 06 Mar 2007 | DPA

Taipei - Taiwan has test-fired missiles capable of hitting major economic centres of rival China, local news media reported Tuesday, amid a new tension across the Taiwan Strait. Military-funded Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology test-fired the local-made Hsiung Feng 2E, which has a range of up to 1,000 kilometres, last month, Taipei-based United Daily News reported.

Quoting an unnamed institute source, the paper said the missile is able to hit Hong Kong, Shenzhen and Shanghai - the economic centres of China in the south and central parts of the mainland.

It said President Chen Shui-bian inspected the test-firing along with Defence Minister Lee Jye.

The defence ministry, however, declined to comment on the report. The institute also refused to confirm whether it had test-fired the missile or not.

But parliamentarians of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) said it explained why Chen was bold enough to say that Taiwan must declare independence.

They said the fact that Taiwan is capable of producing missiles that can threaten China has given Chen a strong boost.

Taiwan and China split at the end of a civil war in 1949, but Beijing still regards the island an integral part of the mainland. It has repeatedly warned that if Taiwan ever declares independence officially, it will send forces to attack the island.

............ The comments prompted Beijing to lash out at Chen. Washington, an informal ally of Taiwan and arms supplier for the island, also demanded that Chen keep his previous promises to refrain from further escalating cross-strait tensions.

David Wang, spokesman of Taiwan's foreign ministry, Tuesday said he had no idea about the test-fire issue, but stressed Taiwan must have adequate defence capability to safeguard itself in the face of rapid military buildup of China.

(Excerpt) Read more at earthtimes.org ...

[American Patriot]

War of words after call for independence
timesonline ^ | March 06, 2007 | Jane Macartney in Beijing

The simmering feud between China and Taiwan burst into the open yesterday when Beijing criticised the President of Taiwan for making strident calls for independence.

Li Zhaoxing, the Chinese Foreign Minister, speaking at the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in Beijing, said: “Don’t listen to local leaders. Whoever wants to split away will become a criminal in history.”

His anger, which came a day after the announcement of an 18 per cent increase in Chinese military spending, was triggered by remarks at the weekend by Chen Shui-bian, the President of the self-ruled island that lies within striking distance of the southern coast of China. Beijing has regarded Taiwan as a renegade province since the Nationalist armies fled there after losing the civil war in 1949.

The Taiwanese President, who has accelerated his drive to edge the island towards formal independence from China, told a pro-independence group at the weekend: “Taiwan should be independent.” He added: “Taiwan is a country whose sovereignty lies outside the People’s Republic of China.”

Such bold declarations enrage the Communist rulers of China, who have threatened to take back the island by force if it abandons its formal goal of eventual reunification, and declares independence.

Mr Chen said Taiwan should change its official title, the Republic of China — a statement certain to worry his key ally, the United States, which seeks to maintain the status quo. America switched diplomatic recognition to Beijing from Taipei in 1979, recognising “one China”, but is obliged by the Taiwan Relations Act to help the island to defend itself.

The President, speaking in his native Taiwanese dialect, proposed what he called a “four wants” policy: independence, a new constitution, development and new names for local companies that use the word China in their title. This is a shift from his previous “four nos” pledge in 2000 not to move towards independence if China did not threaten the use of force. Mr Chen, weakened by a corruption scandal involving his son-in-law and wife, is trying to drum up support for his Democratic Progressive Party before legislative elections at the end of the year. His actions in recent weeks have been apparently aimed at portraying himself and his party as willing to stand up to threats from China in the interests of greater independence for an island that has ruled itself for nearly 60 years.

The word China was replaced by Taiwan on postage stamps on February 28, an emotive date in Taiwan since it was the 60th anniversary of an uprising against Generalissimo Chiang’s Nationalists that was suppressed and resulted in more than 10,000 deaths. Last week the Chinese Petroleum Corporation became CPC Corporation, Taiwan, while China Shipbuilding Corp is to change its name to CSBC Corporation, Taiwan. China has adopted a low-key response to Mr Chen, generally choosing to ignore him and waiting for the possible election of a less confrontational Nationalist leader.

The main Taiwanese opposition Nationalist Party said that it did not support independence and called Mr Chen’s direction a “disaster for Taiwan”.

[vector7]

Why 2012 will be a deadly deadline

By J. Michael Cole 寇謐將
Wednesday, Jul 15, 2009, Page 8

At no time since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government fled to Taiwan has the Chinese Communist Party been so close to accomplishing its objective of annexing Taiwan.

Rather than achieve this through threat of force or diplomatic pressure, Beijing is using economic integration — a process launched soon after President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) came to office last year — to reel Taiwan in.

Through three rounds of talks between the Straits Exchange Foundation and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait, direct cross-strait charter flights, increased Chinese tourism, large purchases of Taiwanese electronics by Chinese corporations and direct investment in 100 industries in Taiwan’s manufacturing, services and public infrastructure sectors, China has successfully increased Taiwan’s dependence on its economy.

Despite the Ma government’s claims to the contrary, a proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) between Taiwan and China would only exacerbate that dependence by forcing all of Taiwan’s exports to ASEAN countries to pass through China, thus killing Taiwan’s chances of striking bilateral trade agreements with countries in that bloc — the very kind of market diversification that Taiwan should be aiming for.

As Taiwan inexorably drifts into China’s sphere of influence, politicians and academics around the world have hailed Ma’s policy, calling him a “masterful” politician who is not only “saving” Taiwan’s struggling economy, but more importantly, defusing tensions in the Taiwan Strait and creating the conditions for a peace agreement.

Amid enthusiasm for Ma’s “pragmatic” policymaking, the apprehensions of millions of people who fear for their livelihoods and the future of their country have been ignored, as has the fact that poll after poll has shown high levels of dissatisfaction with the Ma administration for its failure, among other things, to meet election promises and to halt the erosion of democracy.

Over and over again, experts and foreign media have portrayed the Taiwanese independence movement and the majority of Taiwanese who want to maintain a political “status quo” on the question of unification as immature throwbacks of the Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) administrations whose political agendas supposedly risk war with China.

Very few China and Taiwan “experts” have asked why the Lee and Chen administrations acted the way they did, and an equally small number seem to have bothered to explore the local political impact of Ma’s pro-China policies — or, for that matter, what the consequences would be should his plans be sidetracked.

Lee — a statesman of a standing that Ma could never match — and Chen were childish, irrational and dangerous because they were more cautious and patient in their engagement with China. Ma, on the other hand, has plunged in head first, and for this he is being called mature.

As economic integration intensifies, we are hearing calls for cross-strait talks on more convoluted political matters, which, despite Taipei’s claim to proceeding cautiously on that front, are inevitable given that Beijing has already made it clear that it sees economic integration as a stepping stone to political integration.

But few experts have asked what a “peace” agreement between Taipei and Beijing entails, namely Taiwan’s capitulation and admission that it is part of China. If things continue apace, it is possible that a few years from now Beijing will accomplish its objective by “peaceful” means — peaceful in the sense of a hostile corporate takeover.

Only recently have specialists started asking why, if things are going so well in the Strait, should China continue to modernize its military and expand its arsenal with equipment at least partly intended for a Taiwan contingency, including increasingly accurate short-range missiles?

What some experts fail to see is that by celebrating cross-strait detente of the kind initiated by the Ma administration and its counterpart in Beijing, and by deliberately ignoring the very substantial opposition that existed and is now growing within Taiwan, they are helping to create the conditions for a conflict in the not-so-distant future that could be far more serious than anything seen before — one that would almost inevitably involve deadly force.

Unless political dissent in Taiwan can be smothered, democratic forces could threaten to derail Ma’s efforts, especially as more controversial aspects of cross-strait exchanges grow nearer. And the principal threat will not be referendums on an ECFA or public protests, but the 2012 presidential election.

Despite its lack of experience with democracy, Beijing is aware of the threat of electoral retribution in Taiwan, which could bring into office a pro-independence party or a KMT administration that is not as pliant as Ma’s. At the least, legislative elections could correct the imbalance that the Ma administration has enjoyed since it came to power and weaken the KMT’s control of the executive and legislative branches, which is part of the reason why Ma has been able to ignore calls for caution, transparency and accountability in his China policy.

As such, Beijing is probably calculating that if it is to succeed in annexing Taiwan, it must do so before 2012. We can expect pressure to build very soon for accelerated economic integration and for political matters to be put on the agenda of cross-strait talks.

In this light, it is easier to explain why cross-strait detente has not been accompanied by an expected military drawdown on Beijing’s part. In fact, 2012 will not be much different from the 1996 elections, when the Chinese military fired missiles off Taiwan’s major ports to influence the country’s first free presidential elections. Back then, Beijing was sending the signal that if Taiwanese voted for Lee, they were choosing war — a threat that, as history showed, was hollow given the power disparity between China on one side and the US and Taiwan on the other.

This time around, however, after more than a decade of major investment in its military and new weapons systems, such as second-generation nuclear submarines and anti-ship ballistic missiles, Beijing is in a much better position to intimidate not only Taiwan but also the US, should it feel compelled to dispatch carrier battle groups to or near the Strait amid tensions.

During the presidential election campaign in 2011 and early 2012 the KMT could also exploit public fears of renewed tensions with Beijing to its advantage and accuse its opponents of risking war. A divided polity will by that time face a choice between irreversible political annexation or military attack.

Another factor that makes 2012 such a dangerous time in the Strait — especially if there is a possibility of the KMT suffering defeat — is Beijing’s awareness that time is not on its side, and that the longer Taiwan remains separate from China, the further Taiwanese identity will consolidate and more so under a pro-independence government.

Just as dangerous would be Beijing sensing that it had come close to realizing its dream of annexation only to see the chance slip as the result of a democratic process. Chances are that rather than admit defeat, it would use force to complete its agenda, an option all the more attractive given the cuts the Ma administration has made to the defense establishment.

To experts looking in from the outside, Ma may appear to be a masterful and pragmatic politician, but by refusing to address the concerns of a majority of Taiwanese, and by undermining democracy in his pursuit of what he sees as a sacred mission, Ma is sowing the seeds for disaster.

By hailing Ma as a hero yet failing to understand the dynamics within Taiwan, and by neglecting to challenge him to act more democratically, all that the experts are doing is increasing the probability that 2012 will augur a grave threat to peace in the Taiwan Strait.

J. Michael Cole is a writer based in Taipei and the author of Democracy in Peril: Taiwan’s Struggle for Survival from Chen Shui-bian to Ma Ying-jeou.