Made in Taiwan, China demand by Beijing sparks Taiwan protests

China's practice of economic nationalism means that it is will always move toward reducing or blocking imports while attempting to get those firms to move their production operations to China. It will also use its economic relations with Taiwan to continue the pressure on Taiwan to incorporate.

A good example is this DPA report on China's move to put pressure on Taiwan to mark its exports Taiwan, China.

Taiwan was to persuade China to drop its demand that all Taiwanese goods exported to China must be marked 'Made in Taiwan Province of China,' it was reported Sunday.

'We will not accept China's demand, and will hold talks with China to find a solution,' the Liberty Times quoted Vice Economics Minister Lin Sheng-chung as saying.

'Both Taiwan and China are WTO (World Trade Organization) members, and Taiwan is a separate tariffs territory recognized by WTO,' he said. 'Therefore, China's demand violates WTO rules and hurts Taiwan exporters' interests.'

According to the report, China had stipulated as early as 2005 that Taiwanese goods sold to China be marked as coming from 'Taiwan, China' or 'Taipei, China.'

But the request by the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade had not been taken seriously by Chinese customs until recently.

In recent months, several regions in China have begun to screen the source of origin of Taiwanese goods, and rejected those marked 'Made in Taiwan,' the report said.

Just think: China's desire to annex Taiwan is now a formal trade barrier to Taiwan goods entering China. It's good that Taiwan officials will negotiate on that one, but don't expect any progress. China can easily maintain a secret policy of blocking "Made in Taiwan" while piously claiming that it is all error or local issues, as they did with the Olympic formulation of Zhonghua Taibei.

Acceding to this demand would make the Ma Administration unpopular and hurt its chances at the polls. It will be interesting to see whether Beijing pulls back on this one until after the 2012 election, when a Ma victory will make the sellout a foregone conclusion.

The best part of this report was the typo in the historically inaccurate "split in '49" refrain:

LOLz to The Chinese "Rationalists". But note how the next paragraph actually attempts to represent what Taiwan's position is. Good work, DPA.

UPDATE: Don't miss Don's excellent comment below.

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Joint Letter to Speaker Wang on ECFA Eng/Chinese

Here is the text of the Joint Letter to Speaker of the Legislature Wang as discussed in the post below this one:

++++++++++++++++

The Honorable Wang Jin-pyng
Speaker of the Legislative Yuan
1 Chung-shan South Rd
TAIPEI,
TAIWAN 10040 May 14th 2010


Dear Mr. Speaker,

As strong supporters of a free and democratic Taiwan, we would like to call your attention to a number of concerns we have regarding the ongoing negotiations between the government of Taiwan and of the People’s Republic of China to arrive at an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA).

While in principle an economic agreement between the two countries would be laudable, it concerns us that there has been a lack of transparency and legislative checks and balances on the part of the government in Taiwan: Media and civic groups have complained about the secrecy of the negotiations, and the fact that there is no clarity on what the agreement would entail, or what impact it would have on Taiwan’s economy, in particular its agriculture, small and medium-size industries and the labor force.

Furthermore, the Legislative Yuan appears to be sidelined in the decision-making process, which does not bode well for the island’s young democracy. Against this background we urge you to emphasize that you attach great importance to checks and balances in a democratic system. It is also imperative that the Taiwan government seek a democratic consensus on this important decision through a public referendum of all people in Taiwan before the agreement is signed.

Many in Taiwan and abroad are also concerned about the impact of closer economic ties on Taiwan’s de facto independence and sovereignty: they feel that closer economic ties will give the government in Beijing leverage to push Taiwan into further political isolation. This would make it increasingly difficult for the people of Taiwan to maintain their freedom, basic human rights and democracy, and determine their own future. The problem is of course that China unjustifiably claims sovereignty over Taiwan, and doesn’t recognize its right to exist as a free, democratic and independent nation.

If Taiwan increasingly moves into the sphere of influence of a still very undemocratic China, this will have a negative impact on democracy and human rights in Taiwan itself, and on its role as a beacon for democracy in East Asia. We feel that the present approach by the Ma administration is too much predicated on China having a say in how Taiwan relates to the rest of the world. In our view, Taiwan should be accepted in its own right, and be able to sign free trade agreements with other nations without going through China.

We may also refer to recent statements by two of Taiwan’s strongest supporters in the US Congress, who are very critical of the proposed agreement: in a briefing on April 28th 2010, Congressman Robert Andrews (D-NJ) referred to it as a “cage” for Taiwan from where it will be difficult to escape, while Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) referred to it as a “Trojan Horse,” one gift-horse Taiwan should not allow in, because the authorities in Beijing are using it as a political tool with the ultimate goal of absorbing Taiwan.

Mr. Speaker, we hope you will agree with us that maintaining a free and democratic Taiwan is essential, not only for the people in Taiwan themselves, but also for the cause of freedom and democracy in East Asia as a whole. We thus urge you to take a critical look at the proposed Agreement, and ensure that the economic, political and strategic interests of the Taiwanese people are fully safeguarded.

Looking forward to hearing from you,

Sincerely yours,

[signatories listed at bottom of this post]

立法院院長王金平先生
台灣台北市中山南路一號 (10040) 05-14-2010

王院長鈞鑒：

因為我們是自由與民主台灣的強力支持者，我們非常關心台灣政府與中華人民共和國政府正在談判的經濟合作架構協議​(ECFA)。我們希望您能關注這個協議所產生的一些疑慮。

雖然在原則上，兩個國家間的經濟協議是值得讚許的；我們關心的是此協議談判過程缺乏透明度，而台灣的立法院也無法發揮制衡的力量。這種秘密的談判方式引起媒體和民間團體的不滿，他們抱怨台灣政府對於此協議的內容和將會涉及的層面，和對台灣經濟的影響完全沒有交代清楚，特別是對農業，小型和中等規模的產業和勞動階層的影響都語焉不詳。

此外，立法院在此決策過程當中似乎是被排除在外，這對台灣的民主制度並不是一個好兆頭。在此我們敦促您重視民主國家制衡制度的重要性。更重要的是台灣政府在協議簽署前應舉辨公民投票以尋求全民共識。

在台灣和海外有很多人關心台灣與中國更緊密的經貿關係會影響台灣事實的獨立和主權: 他們認為這更緊密的經貿關係，將給予北京政府更大的影響力，進一步在政治上孤立台灣。這將使得台灣人民愈來愈難維護他們的自由民主，基本人權以及決定自己前途的權利。台灣的難題是歸因於中國對台灣主權無理的要求，而且不承認自由﹐民主和獨立台灣的生存權利。

如果台灣日益進入強權中國的勢力範圍，這對台灣的民主和人權， 以及它作為東亞民主燈塔的角色將有負面的影響。我們認為馬政府目前治國的方法，處處聽命於中國尤其是有關台灣的國際關係。我們認為台灣有權利與其他國家簽署自由貿易協定，不必透過中國。

我們也可以參考最近在美國國會兩位台灣最強大支持者的聲明，他們對此協定也多有批評: 在 2010 年 4 月28 日的簡報中，眾議員 Robert Andrew (民主黨-紐澤西州) 將此協議比喻成一個台灣將難以逃脫的 "鳥籠"， 而國會議員 Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (共和黨-佛羅裡達州) 則提到它將成為"木馬屠城" 的工具, 台灣絕對不能讓它進來﹐因為北京當局利用它當政治手段，而起最終目的是要併吞台灣。

院長先生﹐我們希望您會同意我們的看法﹐也就是維護台灣民主自由的迫切重要性﹐不只是針對台灣而言，它也牽連到東亞整體上的自由民主。因此我們敦促您嚴格謹慎審查此協議的條文，以充份保障台灣人民的經濟，政治和戰略利益。

我們期待您的回應。

敬祝

順頌 鈞安

2010年五月十四日



1. Ambassador Nat Bellocchi, former Chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan
2. Coen Blaauw, Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington DC
3. Gordon G. Chang, author, "The Coming Collapse of China"
4. Peter Chow, Professor of Economics, City College of New York
5. Stéphane Corcuff, Associate Professor of Political Science, China and Taiwan Studies, University of Lyon, France
6. Michael Danielsen, Chairman, Taiwan Corner, Copenhagen, Denmark
7. June Teufel Dreyer, Professor of Political Science, University of Miami, Florida
8. Norman W. Getsinger, U.S. Foreign Service (Retired), The George Washington University Graduate Program, Washington DC
9. Terri Giles, Executive Director, Formosa Foundation, Los Angeles
10. Michael Rand Hoare, Emeritus Reader at the University of London, Great Britain
11. Thomas G. Hughes, Former chief of staff to the late Senator Claiborne Pell (D-RI), Washington DC
12. Richard C. Kagan, Professor Emeritus of History, Hamline University, St. Paul Minnesota. Author, “Taiwan’s Statesman, Lee Teng-hui and Democracy in Asia”
13. Jerome F. Keating, Associate Professor, National Taipei University (Ret.). Author, "Island in the Stream, a quick case study of Taiwan's complex history" and other works on Taiwan’s history
14. Hon. David Kilgour, former Member of Parliament and Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific (2002-2003), Canada
15. André Laliberté, Associate Professor, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa, Canada
16. Daniel Lynch, Associate Professor, School of International Relations, University of Southern California
17. Victor H. Mair, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Pennsylvania
18. Donald Rodgers, Associate Professor of Political Science, Austin College, Texas
19. Terence C. Russell, Associate Professor of Chinese, Asian Studies Centre, University of Manitoba, Canada
20. Christian Schafferer, Associate Professor, Department of International Trade, Overseas Chinese Institute; Chair Austrian Association of East Asian Studies, Editor Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia, Vienna, Austria
21. Michael Stainton, York Center for Asia Research, Toronto, Canada
22. Peter Tague, Professor of Law, Georgetown University, Washington DC
23. John J. Tkacik Jr., former Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, and former officer at the Taiwan Coordination Desk, Department of State, Washington DC
24. Arthur Waldron, Lauder Professor of International Relations, University of Pennsylvania
25. Vincent Wei-cheng Wang, Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond, Virginia
26. Gerrit van der Wees, Editor Taiwan Communiqué, Washington DC
27. Michael Yahuda, Professor Emeritus, London School of Economics, and Visiting Scholar, George Washington University
28. Stephen Yates, President of DC Asia Advisory and former Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Please Washington, an FTA for Taiwan

As the Taipei Times reported today, a major event in Washington DC Thursday brought together 16 Taiwanese-American organizations to argue that ECFA is a bad idea. To wit:

A large group of Taiwanese-Americans have launched a three-pronged attack on an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) between Taiwan and China, claiming that it is no more than “a fast track toward annexation of Taiwan by China.”

They have sent a joint statement to US President Barack Obama calling on him to urge Taiwan’s government to conduct a public and democratic referendum on an ECFA; they have organized a Washington conference for prominent academics to condemn an ECFA; and they have released a letter from 28 major US supporters of Taiwan to Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) asking him to make a critical review of the proposed agreement.

The joint statement to Obama, backed by 16 of the largest and most influential Taiwanese-American organizations, also asks the president to negotiate a free-trade agreement with Taiwan.

It says that because China may use an ECFA to take over Taiwan, the agreement would ultimately have a negative impact on the US strategic position in East Asia.

All the right points were hit, including the need for a US-Taiwan FTA. But such an FTA offer might be deeply offensive to China's leaders, and the US has shown great reluctance to offend them on a wide range of issues -- note the complete lack of public complaints about China's aid to Iran's nuke program, for example.

In the blizzard of press conferences recently President Ma Ying-jeou made a few comments about trade agreements with the US:

Taipei, May 20 (CNA) President Ma Ying-jeou reiterated Taiwan's intention to tighten ties with the United States under an established trade framework and continue to buy arms from Washington, at a press conference Wednesday to mark the second anniversary of his inauguration.

Ma told local and international media that Taiwan has opted to further develop trade and commercial ties with the U.S. under the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) , rather than pursue amore comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA).

He said both sides are trying to use a "block-building" format that would rely on a series of specific deals under the TIFA framework, such as a bilateral investment agreement and an agreement on avoidance of double taxation, to enhance cooperation.

Ma was responding to a question on how he viewed the statement by American Institute in Taiwan Chairman Raymond Burghardt that "Taiwan might not be ready for an FTA with the U.S." because it still wants to protect some local sectors.

Ma said Taiwan and the U.S. will not discuss an FTA because the Trade Promotion Authority, authorized by the U.S. Congress, has expired, adding that an enhanced TIFA will still be an effective tool for bilateral trade liberalization.

The existing TIFA framework has a long pedigree, and at present, Congress hasn't granted the authority to engage in FTA negotiations. Note the normal modus operandi for Ma: soothing comments wouldn't it be great to have an FTA with the US but -- oh, too bad we can't and then the instant return to the status quo: well, we still have this TIFA thing. We can just operate under that, like we always have. Ma again referred to the F-16s -- it's been how many years since he was initially Chairman of the KMT and promised to get that done? Yet here we are years later and the F-16s are like the Zeno's Paradox of Weapons Deliveries, always on their way, but never quite arriving.

ECFA is going to come into existence. Opposition to it is important because it forces the Ma Administration to make at least cosmetic concessions to the needs of the island, like its belated commitment to a crackdown on smuggling from China (whoopee, a whole 15 minute crackdown), but the opposition, at least in the US, needs to move into a new phase of pushing Congress to grant Trade Promotion Authority and then moving for the US to negotiate an FTA with Taiwan. This may not actually result in anything happening -- I suspect the same mysterious sluggishness we've seen with the F-16 sale will also occur with the US-Taiwan FTA which similarly will gather "strong support" and "positive reviews from experts" etc etc etc but will somehow never happen. But is important to keep pushing so as to make room for other FTAs and to keep the pressure on the CCP and the KMT. And who knows, perhaps the horse will learn to sing....
_____________
Daily Links:

• How will an ECFA affect Taiwan? Check out this piece from January on Indonesia's request to renegotiate its FTA with China due to the destruction of many of its industries.
• Taiwan News with a fabulous editorial on the Racialism of Ma's policies and ECFA:
  

  About the only promise made by Ma on his handling of cross-strait relations that we may take seriously is his promise that there will be no "unification" talks as such a formal exercise will be unnecessary.
  
  All that is needed is for the KMT regime to accept in substance the suzerainty of the CCP and for the Beijing regime to reciprocate by mercifully allowing a vassal KMT regime to continue to use the "Republic of China" name within Taiwan only, just as Beijing did with the traditional Tibetan government in the early 1950s.



• For amusement purposes only: this incredibly wrong piece in the Edmonton Journal on how pragmatic Taiwan is compared to Canada in its China relations.
  
• China's war plans against India: the Peaceful Riser^© takes Arunachal Pradesh in 48 hours.
• Taiwan What's Up latest issue out.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Poller Eyes Taiwan

This week a pile of polls came out. Let's take a look:

In the City Formerly Known As Taipei County (Sinbei or Xinbei or New North City), UDN says the KMT's Chu currently thumps DPP Chair Tsai Ing-wen 47-29% in support for the mayoral post, but interestingly, when asked who would win, people say it will be 41-27% in favor of Chu.

The Rolling Stones may be frustrated, but Ma can get satisfaction: the pro-KMT China Times has Ma 43% satisfied, 40 unsatisfied. The negative for Ma in that poll? 60% say employment opportunities have decreased. However, given the rising economy, that number should fall.

Apple Daily also found 42% satisfied, 38% unsatisfied. But would you vote for Ma if the election were held tomorrow? had 45% yes vs 43% no.

Global Views has 30.4% satisfied, 58% unsatisfied with the President of the ROC. GV's numbers show a reasonable upward trend and likely better reflect reality. UPDATE: Pro-KMT TVBS has Ma at 33% satisfied, 47% wanting their money back, very similar to the Global Views poll. At this point it looks like Ma's negatives have troughed and he and his party will likely rise as the export boom makes itself felt.

Meanwhile, the pro-DPP Liberty Times announces that its poll shows that either Su Tseng-chang or DPP Chair Tsai Ing-wen would beat Ma in 2012. Su, maybe, but Tsai?
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Good Economic News -- Growth Skyrockets on China growth and trade recovery

Businessweek has the skinny:

Taiwan’s economy grew at the fastest pace in more than 30 years last quarter on surging sales of computer chips and display panels to China, as it heals ideological wounds with its neighbor in favor of trade ties.

Taiwan, Singapore and Japan all reported yesterday that growth accelerated in the first quarter, boosted by a rebound in global trade. In Taiwan, which outpaced China’s 11.9 percent expansion, policy makers are weighing the risk of raising interest rates from a record low against fallout from the debt crisis sparked by Greece, after April export orders from Europe fell 11 percent from the previous month.

“Taiwan benefited a lot from a rebound in the Chinese economy,” said Tony Phoo, an economist at Standard Chartered Plc in Taipei. “The economy is still prone to external uncertainty, with the Greek crisis already feeding into the export data.”

The statistics bureau yesterday raised its 2010 GDP growth projection to 6.14 percent from 4.72 percent, and its annual inflation forecast to 1.4 percent from 1.27 percent. The Central Bank of the Republic of China (Taiwan) has kept its benchmark interest rate at 1.25 percent since March last year to help extract the island from its deepest recession on record.

.....

The planned trade accord with China has attracted overseas investors, spurring Taiwan’s dollar in April to its biggest monthly advance since September. The currency reached NT$31.269 per U.S. dollar on April 27, the strongest since August 2008.

The Taiwan dollar dropped 0.1 percent to NT$32.140 against its U.S. counterpart as of 11:48 a.m. today, according to Taipei Forex Inc. The island’s benchmark Taiex stock index fell 2.3 percent to 7,255.67, poised for its lowest close since Feb. 8.

“Investors are losing confidence,” said Robyn Hsu, who helps manage $3 billion at Capital Investment Trust Corp. in Taipei. “Taiwan’s gross domestic product growth will slow through the year despite a very stunning first-quarter figure yesterday. Falling commodity and gold prices suggest investors are retreating even from relatively safe markets.”

Lessee..... according to one of those investor rating thingies, Taiwan has the eighth most competitive economy in the world. Hookay.

Whatever you might think of our actual competitiveness, our current investments in and trade with China, the result of policies of the Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian administration, have growth skyrocketing on China's growth, and growing world trade. Tell me again why we need ECFA? So we're not marginalized "like North Korea" as Regional Administrator Ma informs us?

Apparently it is possible to achieve solid growth without ECFA.

ECFA isn't a panacea for marginalization. What it really is, is just another status quo policy that will enable Taiwan to continue doing what it is doing now without having to move forward with progressive, future oriented policies. Ma talks a lot about the future, but the truth is that most of the KMT's policies are status quo policies. The China-oriented policies of the KMT are largely status quo, from bringing Chinese students into Taiwan to save our low-end universities -- many of them run by families or firms with old connections to the KMT -- and forego the need to upgrade the university system. Chinese tourists mean that the tourist infrastructure won't need to be upgraded to international levels, new markets cultivated and developed, and new languages and mores learned. We can just expand whatever tourist infrastructure we have now to galactic scale. ECFA is simply going to pickle the current economy in the brine of faux globalization.

What do we really need? Example: I attended a presentation by a former Taiwan teacher now with a publishing company overseas. He began his presentation by noting that last year, 200,000 students in South Korea took the TOEFL... but not for college. No, they were trying to gain entry into Korea's English High Schools. How many English High Schools does Taiwan currently plan to implement?

Why do I ask such stupid questions?
____________
Daily Links:

• Klaus with a great post on foreign laborers here.
• Rebiya Kadeer with piece in Huffington Post.
• China inks massive cement deal with South Africa. It's a good thing the US is spending hundreds of billion to make Afghanistan safe for Chinese expansion instead of wasting all that money investing in our domestic economic infrastructure, converting our economy away from fossil fuels, or building our foreign trade portfolio.
• January piece on Chinese cyberattacks on US oil firms. Time for some serious action, Washington.
• China targets photocopiers in Tibet.
• Craig Ferguson with some excellent pics of the ECFA sit in.
• BBC's Cindy Sui with a great long piece on ECFA, including -- incredibly for a major media article -- a good look at the pro-Taiwan side and correct poll information. Fabulous.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Wild At Heart Bus Ads About Formosa Plastics

Even as Taiwan implements mandatory environmental education, Wild At Heart takes out ads on buses in Taipei publicizing megagiant corporation Formosa Plastics 2009 Black Planet Award from Ethik & Okonomie. The video above shows the ads on the side of Taipei buses. The Taipei City government ordered them removed because they hadn't been "properly cleared" whatever that means, and somebody defaced the word "shame" in the ads. Another Public Television video in Mandarin is here.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Encouraging Foreigners' China Aspirations

Lots of ECFA stuff out there this week, with President Ma talking to the media continuously since the debate with DPP Chairman Tsai. It almost looks like the KMT wants it to appear that the debate was some kind of turning point and is now in full on media blitz to gain control of the talking points.

First there were the usual happy noises from the US side. As Obama administration officials said nice things about the KMT-CCP closeness, Paul Wolfowitz, currently head of the US-Taiwan Business Council, said:

In related news, former World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz said May 17 that with the ECFA Taiwan will have “unprecedented access to the [mainland] Chinese market. Given its democratic system, its advanced economy and its centrality in global manufacturing and supply chains, Taiwan has the potential to become a leading economic and business-operations hub in Asia.”

In addition to benefiting the economy, the pact will also help meet Taiwan’s national security needs, he said.

Wolfowitz, current chairman of the U.S.-Taiwan Business Council, and a former deputy secretary of defense, undersecretary of defense for policy and assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific affairs in the State Department, spoke at a conference on Taiwan’s economy at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research in Washington.

He urged the Ma administration to engage in in-depth consultations with the opposition Democratic Progressive Party, which has raised objections to the ECFA. “Taiwan needs the ECFA, and it needs an uncontroversial ECFA supported by both parties,” he said.

Wolfowitz pointed out that signing the ECFA will also promote relations between Taiwan and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. He specifically called on Beijing, once the ECFA is sealed, to declare that it would be happy to see the signing of a free trade agreement between ASEAN and Taiwan. (THN)

While the Taiwan Today piece above highlighted Wolfowitz's remarks on ECFA, the Taipei Times had a fuller article that gave a more robust picture of his remarks:

“What would make a real substantive difference would be if Taiwan could bring more international businesses to Taiwan. Maybe I am exaggerating here, but I think getting one major international corporation to make Taiwan the base for its regional operations would be worth more than all the possible memberships and participation in international organizations,” Wolfowitz said.

US business leaders found that Hong Kong provided a much more business-friendly environment than Taiwan, he said, despite the fact that Taiwan has major advantages over Hong Kong, including space and geography, air quality and freedom of expression, protection of intellectual property rights and the ready availability of Mandarin speakers.

It's always fun to compare outsiders with locals on the subject of Ma Ying-jeou. The pro-KMT paper UDN published another poll on Ma's satisfaction ratings, noting that 39% are satisfied, and 43% unsatisfied.

Ma meanwhile announced a Golden Decade at his latest press conference.

ROC President Ma Ying-jeou spoke of the coming “golden decade” for Taiwan while outlining his vision for the nation’s future at a news conference on the eve of his second year in office.

“I will do whatever benefits Taiwan and its people,” Ma said during his “Stride Forward, Create a Golden Decade” address delivered before a contingent of local and foreign media representatives at the Presidential Office May 19.

After nearly 24 months in power, Ma said the Kuomintang administration has succeeded in cracking down on corruption, promoting human rights, reforming financial policies, reaching consensus with the opposition Democratic Progressive Party, initiating cross-strait dialogue, and expanding Taiwan’s international space.

Read that list carefully...

• ....has Ma reached a consensus with the DPP? When did this happen?
  
• ....has Taiwan international space expanded? Or has diplomacy on Taiwan's behalf ceased?
• ....what corruption crackdown?
• ....human rights? There's been serious concern on that score among Taiwan watchers.
• ....cross-strait dialogue? Who is carrying that out? Did the Ma Administration initiate it, or was that the DPP (publicly) and the KMT (privately) years before Ma was elected.
  

This is actually similar to the list in his inaugural speech in 2008. And Golden Decade? That's just an updated version of 6-3-3. Ma's handlers are simply recycling his original electoral strategy just in time for the November 3 in 1 elections. The reality of KMT cross-strait strategy was caught in Far Eastern Sweet Potato's post the other day... read the whole post, but note:

So here we are: Only 3.75 percent of all administrative orders have been reviewed by the organ that supposedly keeps the government in check. And yet, Presidential Office Spokesman Lo Chih-chiang (羅智強) was telling reporters on Sunday that “All official dealings with China are supervised by the legislature … Everything is open and transparent.”

Not only are orders not being monitored by the legislature, but amendments are being made that are so vague — intentionally so — that they can open doors to all kinds of abuse. Much as the “in the public interest” clause in the Computer-Processed Personal Data Protection Act (電腦保護個人資料處理法), amended on April 27, is vague enough to allow government authorities to interpret it in a manner that suits their needs, the amendment to the Act Governing Approval for Mainland Area Professionals to Engage in Professional Activities in Taiwan uses language (“making a contribution”) that can mean anything. What are “contributions” and who is the judge of that?

As I wrote in my review of Christine Loh’s (陸恭蕙) study of the Chinese Communist Party in Hong Kong, Underground Front, the danger of signing agreements Beijing-style is that everything is vague and open to interpretation — by those in power. Again, the entire negotiation process during the 1980s, in which the UK and Beijing prepared the terrain for handover in 1997, should be closely studied by Taiwanese watchers, as history appears to be repeating itself. One complaint on the British side and among those in Hong Kong who worried about their future, was that everything was done behind closed doors, by unelected elite with close ties to the business world, with little oversight or supervision, no public consultation. And a heavy does of vagueness.

But what would the week be without this gem of insight from our fearless leader:

“The US has never worried about its sovereignty as its economic ties with China tighten,” said Ma at an interview held by the Central News Agency (CNA), explaining the importance of the trade pact with China.

No comment.
___________
Daily Links:

• Ma's Cronyism risks Taiwan's solvency, says Taiwan News (Video)
• Sinosplice on power struggles when speakers with different language expectations collide
• Canadian Intelligence says Chinese cyber attacks on Canadian targets growing.
• Jon Adams' excellent piece on the Lafayette Scandal at Global Post
• China unhappy with S Korea blaming N Korea for ship sinking.
• Taiwan imposes mandatory environmental education. No really, I'm not making this up.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Harbinger? Tiny Bit of progress in Irrigation Association Elections

A one-off, or a signal of a growing trend that could impact the November local elections? For the first time in many years several pan-Greens have been elected to head Irrigation Associations in Taiwan, a system that has been under a KMT death-grip since the early 1970s. To understand how important this could be, see this post from a few years ago on farmers associations and rural politics.

UDN says (Chinese)(Liberty Times in Chinese):

一向由國民黨掌控的農田水利會系統，昨天的會長、會務委員選舉遭到挫敗，新當選的十四位水利會長，有四席是民進黨籍或傾綠，比本屆增加了三席。國民黨唯一奪回的是民進黨掌八年的南投農田水利會。

Of the 14 irrigation association directorships up for grabs, the DPP or pan-Greens were elected to 4. The KMT snatched back Nantou, which had been DPP for the previous eight years. The overall DPP increase was three seats, from one to four. The pan-Greens now control the irrigation associations of I-lan, Kaohsiung, Pingtung, and Taoyuan. The total number of individuals who are association members is 1.3 million; the election was spread over 147 precincts in 15 irrigation districts (more stats from the TJIA). UDN supplied a nifty chart on the elections:

As a friend of mine remarked when we were talking about this, the drive for ECFA has meant the neglect of farmers, whose locked-in KMT support is now wavering in fury at the government's escalating sell-0ut of their interests. The KMT is shifting its power base away from its rural networks. This aspect of ECFA has not been well-discussed in the English language articles about ECFA, but agreements with China, with their inevitable destruction of Taiwan's smaller businesses, farmers, traditional industries, and local construction -- just wait 'til the big boys from China start bidding on local development projects -- mean that many local Taiwanese who had supported the KMT for years are going to be getting their throats slit (what did they expect?) while at the same time, those businesses that supported the DPP are going to take an economic hit, which may well impact the flow of funds to the DPP. This implies that down in the trenches, there may well be a shift among voters to the DPP, especially in rural areas.

The KMT's answer to this has really been to simply ignore it while locking in Chinese support, and the backing of the US foreign policy and global financial establishments, as well as the support of the cross strait corporate, financial, and organized crime nexus. Another answer it has pursued is its traditional one of scattering money in rural areas to develop patronage networks -- in this case, it has sprayed Chinese tourists about the landscape the way it once sprayed cement, for similar reasons, and with similar effects. The presence of Chinese tourists pumps money into local areas and creates new constituencies committed to the KMT's China policies.

Of course, if this is a trend, much will depend on how well the DPP diagnoses and exploits it.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

The Zain Dean Case: statement

Some of you may recall the case in March in which the Taipei Times reported that "Expat Bailed after hit and run". The report as it currently stands, though it has been corrected for some of the errors identified below (see also the report in the China Post today).

A British businessman, Zain Dean, was released on bail and prohibited from leaving the country by Taipei prosecutors following his alleged involvement in a hit-and-run in Taipei City.

Taipei police said Dean, 39, chief executive officer of NCL Media UK’s Taiwan Branch, has lived in Taiwan for 16 years.

Prosecutors released Dean on NT$150,000 bail on Saturday evening.

As Dean was leaving the Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office, relatives of Huang Chiun-teh (黃俊德), the man killed in the accident, attempted to attack him.

Prosecutors said that during questioning, Dean denied involvement in the accident, saying he was drinking with friends at a hostess pub until the early hours of the morning on Thursday, but because he was drunk, a pub worker drove him home and he had no recollection of any car accident.

Prosecutors said the pub worker denied that he drove Dean home in his car. They said CCTV footage from outside the club showed the pub worker getting into the driver's seat. He returned to the club on foot six minutes later, they added.

The individual in question in this case, Zain Dean, has released a statement that explains why the Taipei Times had to correct information in this report. Those of you with long experience here will nod.... Disclaimers: I have never met Mr. Dean nor anyone else involved and have no involvement in this case whatsoever. This posting represents Mr. Dean's point of view only.

+++++++++++++++

Personal Statement of Zain Dean
Regarding the car accident of morning of 25th March 2010, in Taipei City
Document Date: 6 May 2010

You might have heard some reports of my involvement in an accident that happened recently. There has been much media mis-information regarding my involvement, and this document is an attempt to show the facts of the case as they really happened. Even though my professional career in Taiwan for the past 16 years has come to an abrupt end, it still means a lot to me to let the people who actually know me understand the real truth behind some of the recent sensational headlines.

Firstly, although the accident was not caused by me, (by reading this document and hearing my side, you will be able to make up your own mind about this) the car was owned by me, and I was in the car at the time of the accident. Thus I feel a deep sense of moral responsibility for what happened.

As such I wanted to send my deepest condolences in this time of deep sorrow for the family. I sincerely share their grief at this darkest hour and I feel deep sadness and sorrow.

Recently my own mother passed away, it was a tremendously painful and confusing time. I am aware of the pain and suffering that must be going through the minds of the immediate family of Mr. Hwang, the deceased. I hope that by having more people read this document, the family of Mr Hwang can also find out what actually happened during the early hours of 25th March 2010, and that they can find peace.

RECENT developments:

The English language media, Taipei Times recently published an apology and correction for their incorrect reporting. At least this is a start in getting my name cleared.

Timeline of events.

25 March 2010. 1am. I received a phone call from a Taiwanese man, a neighbour of mine, (Mr A), who called me from a KTV on Lin Sen N Road, and wanted me to come out to meet him. I was already in bed, sleeping, but as Mr A was a extremely wealthy person who had indicated he would be willing to invest in my company, I decided to come out. In Taiwan (and China), the business custom is to go to these kinds of KTV’s/ hostess bars in the early hours, drink whole glasses of alcohol in one swig and ‘talk business/ bond’. It’s not something I have done in the past 16 years of being in Taiwan, as most of my customers are leading corporations competing on the international business arena, looking for brand consulting, corporate communications etc. These kinds of customers are not looking to get drunk in a hostess bar, but rather increased market share on a global basis.

After a few hours of intense drinking, I became very drunk and Mr A decided to change venue. As I had driven my car (initially not intending to drink, since I had for the past several weeks been part of a vegetarian/ non alcoholic / health plan) to the first KTV, and had now become drunk, Mr A called the management of the 2nd KTV (another KTV/hostess bar on Sun Chiang Road) and asked them to send over a driver. Mr A apparently was a regular and big customer of the 2nd KTV, and thus he had preferential treatment. The driver arrived, and took us to the 2nd KTV.

When we arrived, the same process was enacted, however, this time I was so tired, and drunk that I quickly became sleepy and according to Mr A, ‘was no fun’ and he decided to leave.

Mr A then requested the management to provide another driver to take me home, as it was obvious that I would not be able to walk properly, let alone drive. Thus a driver was selected, and I was placed into the passenger seat, and the driver got in the drivers seat, and the car left the front of the KTV (this was recorded on CCTV and provided to the police by the KTV). This was also seen by Mr A.

I was then driven home, indicating to the driver I lived near 101 (I live in one of the buildings in front of the 101 building). What I remember of the ride home was that it was very fast, it was raining, and the sky was dark (still night). Also my head kept bumping up against the glass, as I slumped to the right. I didn’t hear or see anyone being hit (neither did I receive any injury nor the airbag go off).

When we neared the 101, the driver tried to wake me up asking, ‘where do you live, what’s your address?’ I turned around in a half-sleeply state and saw a man I didn’t recognize thus I didn’t want to give him any details of where I lived etc. I simply asked him to drop me off at the corner (SunRen and Hsinyi) of the street behind my house. I then got in the drivers seat (not even at this point noticing the damage on the car) and drove the last couple of hundred meters home, parked the car and somehow made it up to the house.

On arrival at the house, I had to ring the doorbell, as I hadn’t brought my keys or briefcase. My wife asked me about these, and I was unable to answer, still quite drunk. She then went down to the parking lot basement, and found them, and also found that the car had been in an accident. She immediately called Mr A and asked him about it, he said the driver had driven me home and that’s all he knew of the matter.

However, regarding the damage to the car, he also said that we shouldn’t make a big fuss about it, as ‘the parking lot attendants don’t make a lot of money’. The implication was that instead of complaining to the KTV about the damage, we should just get it fixed by ourselves. (In Chinese the phrase was, “bu yao numa jee jow”).

I was unaware of this conversation or that the car had received any damage. The next day my wife called me from work to wake me and asked me what had happened the night before, specifically to the car. I replied, nothing that I knew off. She asked me to go to the basement parking lot to see for myself, and I did so. I was very surprised to see that the damage to the front right side of the car, a broken bumper, a crushed light fitting, body panel damage, radiator damage and some chassis damage.

After discussing this with my wife, I came to the conclusion that the driver must have hit a lamp post or suchlike, as it had been raining etc., and based on what Mr A had said to my wife, I decided to take the car out to the repair shop I normally go to, near my house, and a place I’d been getting my cars over the years repaired time after time. After all, I had been trying to ‘win over’ Mr A and hopefully have him invest in my company, the last thing I wanted to do was to make a mountain out of a molehill.

This repair shop only has one slot for vehicles, so other cars waiting to be repaired must be parked outside on the public road. The owner of the repair shop (Mr M) asked me what had caused this, I said I didn’t know (not wanting to tell him that I had been to a hostess bar, etc). He estimated the repair cost to be quite high if we used new original (Mercedes) parts, but lower if we used second hand parts. Either way, he was not able to give a price, so I left the car outside his shop in full public view and then went home. By this time, it was noon Thursday, the 25th March.

(Note the car in question was a 1994 Mercedes Benz E320, which I bought for 100,000 NTD approximately 2 years ago, at the time of the accident, the market price for such car was approximately 60,000-80,000 NTD).

After a day had elapsed, I visited the repair store and learned that second parts would not be easy to find (radiator) and chassis straightening, numerous panel repairs and a new front bumper would cost over 100,000 NTD using original parts, and for second hand parts, he’d have to take a few weeks to find out.

As I had originally been planning to leave Taiwan at the end of March (all my friends on Facebook and at the Rotary club for example had known this in early March when I had told them) I decided to have the car scrapped instead. I didn’t see the point of spending a lot of money to repair a car, more than it’s worth, nor did I see the point of waiting for weeks until parts could be found as I was planning on leaving in the next few weeks.

(I had made the statement on Facebook and given a speech at the Rotary club to that effect. I had already started giving away my books and paintings to charity, etc. The fact I was getting ready to leave at the end of March, latest April, was not a secret to all those that knew me).

On Friday I told Mr M at the repair store of my idea, and he then proceeded to remove the DVD player etc from the car. I asked my wife to have the car scrapped. After she contacted the scrap yard, she received another offer instead. Instead of scrapping the car (which would be done immediately, on the 26th March) she was offered the option of selling the car instead (which would mean an ownership change that would happen on the 31st).

(Of course, if I had been planning to ‘destroy the evidence’, I would have taken the quicker option, and the car would have been converted to a block of metal immediately. By taking the slower option, I would be leaving the ‘evidence’ open to future investigation, not something one would do if he had the motive to destroy the evidence).

By the evening of Friday the 25th March, I still had no idea whatsoever that my car had been involved in a fatal hit and run. I had spent the afternoon working as usual. In the evening however, my wife received a phone call from Mr A’s wife. She said that she’d seen a newspaper report about the accident, and that it involved a black Mercedes, of the same model as mine. The accident had happened recently. She came round to our house, with Mr A and all four of us looked at the newspaper report. There seemed to be a link and all of us agreed that we should take the initiative and visit the police ourselves and volunteer whatever information we had. Certainly I had not driven the car home so there didn’t seem to be any undue reason to worry.

After they left, I called Mr D, the most senior person at our Rotary club, by number of years in Taiwan. I told him what had happened, and he advised me to (1) voluntarily go to the police and make a statement of what I knew (2) check to see if the car had proper insurance and whether the insurance would cover this kind of accident.

As a result I asked my wife to go to the office and check the insurance paperwork immediately. During this time, I began pacing up and down the apartment, trying to get my head around this situation. I tried calling Mr A to see if he could come with me to the police station, and I couldn’t reach him.

A few minutes after my wife arrived at the office, she called me and told me that the Da An police wanted to meet her near the office and ask her some questions. She had agreed to meet with them, and they had taken her to the police station.

I called Mr D (9.03pm) and updated him on the situation, he again advised to (1) go to the police station voluntarily to see what was going on, and (2) that he’d arrange for a lawyer to come the next morning at 9 am to authorize and approve the content of any statement I would need to make.

At this point, it still wasn’t 100% confirmed that the accident had involved my car, and even if it did, I wasn’t the driver, so I thought I would be able to go to the police station, tell them who the driver was, and come home. I assumed then I would be able to come back the next day with the lawyer Mr D offered, if necessary.

I then got changed into a suit, picked up my briefcase and went down the elevator to find the Da An police waiting for me on the 1st floor. I asked if I could go to the Hsin Yi police station to make my statement and they refused. The reason I wanted to go to Hsin Yi not Da An police station was very simple.....[removed] Also Hsin Yi was right next to my house, a 5 minute walk.

[removed]

In my suit was my wallet, and keys. I didn’t have a passport or toothbrush or anything that would indicate I was trying to ‘escape the country’ as was reported by the media. Also my telephone communication with Mr D and the text messages we exchanged also shows this very clearly.

The Da An police later told the media, whom they invited into the police station right next to where I was being interviewed, that I had been ‘caught’ trying to ‘escape to Jin Men’, which was absolutely incorrect.

I was told by the policemen (CID officer ‘X’) if I had been driving the car at 5am on Chung Hsiao section 5, I said I hadn’t been. He then showed me newspaper reports of the accident. I told them the driver was someone else, a person allocated by the KTV where I had been that evening, to drive me home.

Then at the police station I was asked if I was willing to have a blood test done to test for alcohol or amphetamine use. I agreed and the tests were done at a local hospital.

Officer X insisted I make a statement immediately. I asked for an interpreter from the foreign affairs police, and this was refused to me two times. On the third request, Officer X allowed a foreign affairs police officer from the national police administration to attend (Officer ‘F’).

Unfortunately as it was already quite late now, into the early hours of the morning, and Mr D said he couldn’t get a Chinese speaking lawyer to come out so late.

So I decided to tell Officer F what had happened and who was the driver, and Officer F managed to persuade the Da An police to listen to me and check out my story. Reluctantly Officer X came with us in a police van to the 2nd KTV on Sun Chiang Road.

The officers went to the KTV doorway and asked the parking lot attendants if they had taken any foreigner home a few days ago. They all denied it. Officer F asked me if I would be able to identify the driver. I said I wouldn’t, since I didn’t have a clear recollection of who the driver was (I had been drunk and sleepy) so I didn’t want to implicate anyone innocent. Officer asked again, more forcefully, and then one of the KTV admitted driving me home. This man was then immediately placed into the van.

Then a strange thing happened, whilst officer F was talking to the KTV staff at the KTV next door (there were two KTVs right next to each other) officer X, allowed the other KTV staff to come up to the van where the driver had been placed and started discussing the drivers alibi. I knew this because I speak and understand spoken Chinese fairly well.

They basically started colluding right in front of officer X, as to ‘what had happened’. The driver stated to his co-workers that he didn’t drive me home and that he had come back to the KTV soon after leaving. He told his co-workers where he had ‘dropped me off’ (across the street on the other side), and they started repeating what he’d said, in an effort to commit it to their collective memories and ‘get their story straight’. He told them a location, but wasn’t sure exactly. One of his co-workers gave a suggestion, ‘was it xyz street’, and after a pause, they all agreed it was so.

[removed]

At the police station, I wasn’t asked to give a statement, but now the driver was. After an hour or so, the officer who was questioning the driver came out and said “good news for you” as he patted me on the back, “the drivers confessed to what happened, what he’s stated supports what you’ve said” [paraphrased from Mandarin Chinese]. This was a huge relief for me, and the officers who had been with me to the KTV to pick up the driver also seemed relieved. Officer F, even went as far as saying to the other uniformed police present, “see I told you it wasn’t Dean, I’ve been doing police work for many years, and I have good instincts. When the driver had gotten into the van, I had sat next to him, and I noticed his legs had been shaking, he had been very nervous’.

At this point, we sat in semi circle and I started telling the police about the work I did in Taiwan, working over 16 years under the presidencies of Lee Tung Hwei, Chen and Ma, in different ministries (Ministry of Economics, Foreign Affairs, National Security Council, Tourism, etc). We became friendly and exchanged name cards and telephone numbers. One of the other officers, who had been in a room nearby who had been interviewing my wife, opened the door to see what the commotion was. He even took a picture of us all together, he said, ‘it was like seeing a teacher with his students all chatting together’.

I then sent a text message to Mr D, from our Rotary club (at 2.03am), stating; “Thanks [for your help], now apparently they’ve gotten a confession from the other person [the driver] … what an unexpected blessing … maybe that prayer worked …”

I got a reply back at 2.04am from Mr D; “Prayer does it! I prayed to God to help solve you’re problem. It is good news. Thank you Jesus”

I then replied to him; “Now need to get home … some time soon. Thankyou”

Mr D replied; “At least you can sleep peacefully. Talk to you tomorrow”.

At this point, I was getting ready to go home. But after another hour or so of waiting, I started to wonder what was happening.

Officer F, told me the owner of the KTV had arrived and was talking to the head of the police station in private upstairs.

Later, the tone of the whole office changed. The officers who I’d been joking with all disappeared, including officer F. I noticed that more and more cameramen from the local media had started milling around the foyer of the floor I was on, nearby where I had been sitting. Every time I went to the bathroom, I noticed the number of them was increasing, going from one or two, up to 5 or 6. One time I walked past, I noticed one of the cameramen saying to officer X, “Thanks Big Brother, for giving us this opportunity” and Officer X was saying “don’t mention it”. I started wondering what was going on, and why these media people were there.

The hours were starting to drag by. There was no one around whom I could ask what was happening.

Suddenly officer X appeared and was now very aggressive. “Why don’t you admit you drove the car? We know it was you who drove the car, why don’t you confess now?” I was dumbfounded. “What?” I asked. “You can make your statement now” he demanded.

Then I was asked to strip and allow a photographer to take pictures of my body, which I agreed to. (There were no indications of any accident damage anywhere.)

Officer X at this point wanted a statement written immediately, and wouldn’t allow me to get a lawyer. Originally I had been in constant contact with Mr D, but now it was past 4am, and I couldn’t get any reply from him. I became very worried. The tone had changed, they wanted a statement without a lawyer present. Officer X was very ‘insistent’.

At 8.17am I sent another message to Mr D, “Hi D, things have gone south again, at the police station, I’m still here … And still need a lawyer, can we get [lawyers name removed]? He has no answer. Z”

I then called another senior from our Rotary club, Mr E. Fortunately, he was awake already and directed me to an excellent lawyer he knew of, which I managed to get his home number and he agreed to come over immediately.

After he arrived he helped me to get the statement made (which was exactly as I have described above) and also helped me navigate the questions, most of which had been setup and copied and pasted from the updated drivers statement. (they had been copied and pasted in front of me by officer X). The questions were extremely pointed, and my answers had to be checked and re-checked by my lawyer, as the statement/ questions had been pre-designed to show me as guilty.

After the statement was finished, officer X came in and left. The officer left behind (officer G) then talked to me and my wife in private, he said, “I’m very sorry about what is to happen. This is not the way I like to do things. This has been decided from above”. I asked him what ‘this’ was. He replied, “you are to become the only suspect in this case”. I asked what was to happen to driver, “he’s to be released” said officer G.

At this point I almost broke down with despair. What was happening? Officer G seemed very compassionate. He said, “Just remember, whatever happens … look after your … aura”. Then he left.

I then realized the media had been invited to film ME, and they were waiting for ME to have an emotional reaction. I decided to stay calm and remain composed, even though I was extremely low. The media had been thanking the police officer X for letting them come into the police station and film ME.

Officer G seemed at this point the most supportive. He suggested that I didn’t cover my face and tell the waiting media the truth. I thought this seemed like a good idea. I repeated the idea to another officer who seemed more senior, who became angry at officer G. He said, “What a stupid idea”, and “we don’t want any comments like that made inside the police station”. He then looked at me and suggested I cover my head and face with a mask. I became confused on what I should be doing. I’d never been in this kind of situation, although I’d seen scenes like this on television.

Later, I was escorted into a police car and taken to the criminal court. I covered my face with my jacket and entered went into the basement. I was then delivered to a holding cell.

After many hours went by, I was presented to an investigating prosecutor. Luckily my lawyer was there, and he asked for bail which was granted. [removed]

On leaving the court house, I realized now that it was already dark again, a whole day had passed. Outside a mob was waiting, comprised of media. They drove away the taxi we’d called for. People were punching me, trying to rip my face mask off, my jackets hood was ripped off, my cap was pulled off, my bag pulled from my body, I fell to the ground. It was very frightening, being attacked by a mob and being filmed at the same time. At one point, the goading was too much, and I took a jab at one of the media who were especially confident and aggressive. My wife replied, “stop, don’t, you’ll make it worse”, so I stopped. I saw her being pushed to the ground, she was isolated from me and being stomped and jabbed with an umbrella. (Later her body was found to be covered in bruises). I became aware of a older Taiwanese lady, not a media member trying to hit me, I let her, as I assumed it must have been one of the family members. We ran back into the court house. The policemen there stated they ‘could do nothing’. I told them I wouldn’t leave unless they could get us into a taxi. Initially they insisted they had not jurisdiction outside the courthouse (despite all being in police uniform), but eventually they agreed to go out with us. This time the crowd had abated, the media already had the footage they wanted, and most had left already. When we got into the taxi we were chased around until we managed to evade them. It had been the most hellish 24 hours of my life. Even now, I still couldn’t believe how quickly I had gone from being a normal person, to someone who’d been “found guilty” by the media, and the general public. I hadn’t even been charged with any crime and there was no evidence against me. Is this what justice is supposed to be in modern democratic Taiwanese society? They might as well have had a public hanging.

[I have removed the bottom section of Dean's report, which you can probably find for yourself using Google. In it Dean states that while the video from the KTV says one thing, videos from elsewhere show another. That is why the Taipei Times was forced to run the correction above. ]
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

The Growing Problem of Self-Censorship

Welcome to tomorrow: China's real soft power is its ability to get potential critics in the West to self censor, as an essay in the New York Times describes. We have the same problem here in Taiwan, thanks to a recent law. The Taipei Times reported today:

As an example, he said the enactment of the Civil Service Administrative Neutrality Act (公務人員行政中立法) prohibits officials, including research fellows in public academic institutions, from ­engaging in politics, supporting or opposing political parties, political organizations or candidates for public office.

The act not only deprives civil servants of their basic rights but also restricts academic freedom, Hsu said, adding that the legislation had a “chilling effect.”

“[I know that] some research fellows have worried that they might be in violation of the act if they publish articles that are critical of the government’s environmental policies,” Hsu said.

This is also true of the ECFA debate -- few academic voices have weighed in on the anti-side, except for individuals in think tanks outside the government system, and retired academics like Kenneth Lin.

Politics aside, one powerful reason that academic voices are silenced is the amazing pressure to publish -- to be in a Taiwan university department is to be in a bathysphere at 5,000 fathoms. The system is such that publications outside one's specialty in newspapers or magazines count for little -- never mind the potential political retaliation they might invite. This pressure to publish is merely the upscaled version of the pressure to do homework students in the K-12 system feel, and has the same effects: one of its political functions is to curb the ability of students to participate in politics, or even develop political leanings, by loading up their time with homework.
___________________
Daily Links:

• maddog explores Nat Bellocchi's piece on the myth of reduced tensions
• In case you were wondering whether there were secret links between the CCP and the KMT, Su Chi has set our minds at rest.
• Orders for precision machinery up
• China Post on the Zain Dean case. Unfortunately Dean's side has never made it into the media.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Seediq Bale Teaser

The new movie from the director of Cape No. 7.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Slouching Toward Singapore

Signs of the times: the amendments last month to impose restrictions on what sort of data can be revealed about individuals:

In its second reading of the amendment to the Personal Data Protection Act (個人資料保護法), the legislature passed the new, expanded version covering medical care, genetics, sex, health checks, criminal records, contact information and financial situation, as well as social activities and other personal data.

In addition, media and elected officials publishing personal information must obtain the approval of the party concerned before doing so. Even if it is necessary and in the public interest, one cannot identify the individual concerned.

Violators face criminal charges or an administrative fine, and compensation in a civil court case may reach NT$200 million (US$6.4 million).

Maybe legislators added this text because they are tired of sensational gossip, or was it because they want to prevent other elected representatives, media outlets or pundits from exposing irregularities?

They seem to care little that there are no examples of such legislation in other countries, or that such a law will place severe restrictions on the media.

To many observers the new laws appeared to be restrictions on the media. One issue here is that the local media is like occupation troops -- wherever they appear in person, they chill potential support. A friend of mine was just relating on Facebook how media camped out, illegally, in his office and told him while they waited that they were recording him and that since he was in Taiwan, he should speak Chinese. Arrogant, illegal, and annoying -- everyone who deals with the media here has similar stories. It is hard to gin up sympathy for such unsympathetic figures, but do it we must.

This month brings us another version of the apparent judicial double standard on DPP and KMT prosecutions for the same crime. First, the bare story as reported in the Taipei Times the other day. Read it carefully, noting the prosecution's interesting logic:

Prosecutors yesterday said they had closed their investigation into Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng’s (王金平) use of his special allowance fund, saying that three of Wang’s aides might face charges of forgery.

The Special Investigation Panel under the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office said that Wang spent NT$19 million (US$600,000) on public expenses between February 1999 and December 2007, and claimed a total of NT$14 million in reimbursements. Since the amount spent was more the amount claimed in reimbursements, prosecutors said Wang did not pocket any of the special allowance fund and would not be charged.

Prosecutors discovered, however, that three of Wang’s aides may have used fraudulent receipts to claim reimbursements for Wang.

Prosecutors said the three submitted fraudulent receipts to be used in the accounting for Wang’s special allowance fund, but regulations state that such accounting matters are not required to be approved by Wang.

The Supreme Prosecutors Office in September 2007 indicted then-Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮), then-DPP chairman Yu Shyi-kun (游錫堃) and then-­National Security Council secretary-general Mark Chen (陳唐山) on suspicion of misusing their special allowance funds.

Catch that? The prosecutors say they won't prosecute because more money was spent than was claimed -- but somehow the three accountants got together for some lowdown receipt fraud. Longtime readers -- can you recall any prominent KMT official busted with government money in his personal accounts, cleared, but whose underling was sent to prison for mishandling receipts?

Now the rippin' Taipei Times editorial from today:

Critics who charge that the impartiality of the judicial system has regressed under the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) were presented with more ammunition on Wednesday when prosecutors announced the results of their probe into Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng’s (王金平) use of his special allowance fund.

Absolving Wang of any responsibility for handling his financial affairs, prosecutors said they were instead considering pressing forgery charges against three of his aides for using fraudulent receipts to claim reimbursements.

Looking at Wang’s probe, one cannot help but feel the outcome is remarkably similar to the verdict reached in Ma’s 2007 special allowance trial, when Ma was found not guilty while an unfortunate staffer was sent off to serve time in jail.

Since then, not a single one of dozens of prominent Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) members who have been investigated over their actions as government officials has been charged with illegal use of the allowance system. Any seasoned observer of Taiwan would not expect this to change anytime soon.

Speaker Wang is a longtime heavyweight KMT politician and rival to Ma Ying-jeou within the KMT party.

To refresh your memory, Special Affairs funds are discretionary funds given to thousands of public officials in Taiwan, from cabinet ministers to elementary school principals. The trick is, only half of spending need be accounted for by receipts. The other half needs no receipts. The habit developed in officialdom was thus to keep the other half as sort of off-the-books salary -- a deliberate structure of the system to corrupt its participants and co-opt them into maintaining it. Ma's defense for downloading government funds into his own accounts was essentially just that: everybody did it, and that was the intention of the funds. Now critics are saying that the ruling party appears to have found a new use for the Special Affairs funds....
_______
Daily Links:

• Nat Bellocchi on the myth of the recent "reduction in tension". I've been saying "reduced tensions" is nonsense for a year now. Nice to find others catching up.
• More wind power for Taiwan.
• Taiwan firm ships missile parts to Iran.
• The China Bubble, this one in FP.
• US Cold War military housing in Taiwan.
• Brookings piece on US-Taiwan relations, from Tamkang U professor.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Ottawa Mayor Fails to Create International Incident

Canada was saved from war with China at the last minute as brave Ottawa Mayor Larry O'Brien called off Falun Dafa Day:

Less than a month after returning from a business mission to China, Mayor Larry O'Brien is refusing to proclaim Falun Dafa Day, for fear it might "create any kind of international incident."

The City of Ottawa has made the proclamation in the previous two years, with O'Brien personally signing it in 2008.

Indeed, the spiritual group -- also called Falun Gong -- received notification in April from the city's protocol office that today would be proclaimed "Falun Dafa Day" in the city. Earlier this week, though, the group was told the mayor would not sign the proclamation.

When asked why, O'Brien said Wednesday it was "in the interest of maintaining and developing a continuing stronger economic relation with a country that's going to be important to our future."

According to Bay Councillor Alex Cullen, when he asked the mayor why he would not sign the proclamation, the mayor told Cullen: "I made a commitment." O'Brien did not say to whom, Cullen said.

World Falun Dafa Day was May 14; just type the phrase in Google to find pics and stories. Apparently hundreds of other locales formally or informally hosted events, all without an international incident. Someone sold his integrity for a mess of pottage -- did O'Brien really imagine that it would have any effect on China's trade with Canada if he had proclaimed Falun Gong Day? Beijing was just making noise.

Taiwan? If China goes to this length to strike at its imagined enemies, imagine what's in store for Taiwan in the post-ECFA world.

UPDATE: Commenter alerts me to China Daily piece on O'Brien visit.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

ECFA Wrap

Like the Shadow out of Mordor, integration with China through financial integration with China proceeds apace as the KMT reassured markets that Taiwan was still on the auction block with the appointment of the former Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) Chairman Sean Chen as new vice premier. The position came open with resignation of Eric Chu to run in the November election for mayor of the newly created Shinbei City, the City Formerly Known as Taipei County. ECFA, and President Ma, are strongly supported by the global financial industry.

The Mainland Affairs Council poll finds majority support for ECFA. Also, MAC announces that 99.9% of the North Korean population really did vote for President Kim. Seriously, just for comparison, this figure is a third higher than the more realistic Global Views poll in March, which had "supporting signing ECFA" at 46%.

This week's flap: Reuters reported that Chairman Tsai of the DPP said that the DPP had organized a group for talks with China, but this was quickly rebutted by the DPP....

In a press briefing, DPP spokesperson Lin Yu-chang (林右昌) yesterday said Tsai did not address the issue during the interview, which took place in English. He also denied that the DPP had any plans to organize a group for such a purpose.

The party later released a statement to add: “What Chairperson Tsai said during the interview was that there are many non-governmental organizations and think tanks that the DPP has long relationships with … If China engages in dialogue with these groups, it will help them understand more about the DPP.”

“However, Taiwan is a democratic society, and these groups are independent and are not part of the DPP,” the statement said.

The DPP’s China policies have come under increasing attention after a series of public comments made by Tsai hinted at a subtle shift in how the party would conduct future cross-strait dialogue.

Tsai said in the interview that the DPP would “pursue a separate dialogue mechanism with Beijing, possibly under the umbrella of an outside organization, to seek peace and ‘teach Beijing about the island’s democracy.’”

This was followed by the usual Beijing demand that the DPP give up independence, which was followed by the DPP reiteration that they are always ready to talk to Beijing, provided Beijing does not demand that Taiwan annex itself to China. Of course, the DPP raised the issue of whether Ma had in fact conceded the island's independence in the talks, sparking this editorial from Taiwan News:

President Ma Ying-jeou should explain clearly to the Taiwan public whether his rightist Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang) has accepted political preconditions for engaging in talks with the People's Republic of China, including for the negotiation of the controversial "Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement."

Taiwan's 23 million citizens deserve a clear and frank explanation of the political preconditions for the negotiation of 12 cross-strait agreements between the KMT government and the PRC's Chinese Communist Party regime in the wake of statements by an official PRC government spokesman that such talks are predicated on acceptance of Beijing's goal of "peaceful unification."

Judging from the number of observers in the US who appear to believe that ECFA is just a trade pact (hey it says so in the media, right?), there are many people in the US who haven't grasped this point: in order for talks with China to proceed, Ma must have had to give on the sovereignty issue. That's a PRC precondition. Since such a move would be deeply unpopular in Taiwan, naturally the KMT has been laying down a barrage of words to keep this out of the public view. The DPP should continue to press Ma on this issue.

Where did Lien Chan and the rest of the KMT Old Guard go off to? When the did the focus shift to Ma?

Upcoming protests against ECFA May 20-22 and June 6. The announcement from the Referendum Committee of the Executive Yuan on a referendum on ECFA is due on June 3. The conventional wisdom has it that no referendum will be permitted. My thinking is that a referendum would likely fail due to the time-tested KMT tactics of inducing fail, and thus, if the KMT is smart they will permit the referendum, whose outcome they can control, to go through. However, the recent defeat in the Penghu may scare them off such a move.
___________________
Daily Links:

• Taiwan Central Weather Bureau e-books on climate change and other topics.
• Ultimate Chinglish Experience: try taking the exam in English from the Motor Vehicle Office. It's LMAO bad; it may well be the worst English document I've ever seen here, relative to its frequency of use and importance. If that link fails, try this HTML cached version.
• Taiwan dollar surges on Euro recovery.
• Xinhua: Foxconn suicide cluster. Global Times and China Daily on same.
• Broken clock right: Frank Ching makes sense for a change.
• A Chinese official, busted for shoplifting in Taiwan, is set free by prosecutors, causing much public indignation.
• Taiwan, China hotels blackmailing guests with honey trapped cameras.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Chinese Government Hacking Exposed

I was just going to put a link to this, but it deserves a whole post. If you read one thing today, you must read Ethan Guttman's awesome article on the Chinese government's coordinated hacking, security infiltration of Chinese and Falungong organizations overseas, which revolves around an interview with ex-hacker for the Chinese gov't. A taste:

China’s operational landscape widened. In 2004, a car full of Falun Gong legal-activist practitioners on their way to serve papers against party officials in Pretoria, South Africa, was strafed in a drive-by shooting on a highway outside of the Johannesburg airport. Break-ins and vandalism at the Hong Kong and Taipei offices of a Falun Gong–associated newspaper, Epoch Times, followed. In 2006, the North American Falun Gong system administrator was rolled up in a carpet and beaten while mainland agents ransacked the files and computers in his suburban Atlanta home.

The 6-10 Office also created fake refugees—young, trained to mimic Falun Gong behavior, and holding paperwork confirming time spent in laogai, China’s penal system. “No matter how clever the Australian or the American government is,” Hao told me, “they have no way to distinguish the real [Falun Gong refugees] and the police officers.” To create friction between dissident groups, the refugee-bots planted themselves in dissident media centers in New York and Washington. Even if many were ultimately unmasked, they created havoc for internal network security.

Go to it!
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!