Mail Order Brides

Ralph Jennings, Reuter's man in Taipei, talks about the mail order bride phenomenon here in Taiwan...how many brides are here? Vietnamese brides are the island's largest non-Chinese immigrant group...

The story of women such as Nguyen has prompted Taiwan and Vietnam -- whose 75,000 nationals are the island's largest non-Chinese immigrant group -- to get tougher on cross-border marriages to stop fraud and illegal residency following break-ups.

Taiwan men looking for "mail-order brides" are partial to Vietnamese women who they consider to be particularly submissive, matchmakers say. Often left on the shelf by local women, these men are looking for wives willing to have babies and help their aging parents, the matchmakers add.

Men often enlist friends and business contacts in their wife search. But the popularity of Vietnamese brides is so great that there is now a prime time television show that broadcasts photographs and biographical data of prospective wives.

Those who prefer a more personal approach use the services of about 300 marriage brokers operating in Taiwan who organize wife shopping trips to Vietnam at costs that range from $900 to $10,000 for stays up to one week.

The article goes on to describe some of the legal changes the system is going through to prevent the abuses. As this article from a Washington state paper notes, it is a problem in the US as well.

The mail-bride industry is especially popular in rural areas of Washington, where foreign wives who speak little English can be isolated and kept from knowing their rights and options. "Aside from anecdotes about abuse, we don't yet know the scope of the problem. It's only when someone gets murdered that we hear about it," Basu said.

But even in cities fear is a controlling factor. When the Women's Center held its first on-campus conference, the grieving parents of Anastasia King spoke. And, afterward, Basu said six young women -- like Anastasia, all tall blondes from Eastern European countries -- told her they, too, were in abusive relationships they couldn't escape. One was a UW medical student.

They all told Basu they were afraid to come forward partly because they claimed that the Russian mafia controls the brokerages that brought them here. These businesses boast of shining "95 percent success rates" they don't want tarnished. So, if they divorced, the women feared reprisals against family members still at home.

Just type "mail order brides" in Google. Frightening.

[Taiwan] [Vietnam]

Here and there in Taiwan

Last weekend I attended Michael Klein's wedding in Kaohsiung. While we were waiting for the evening banquet to commence, my family and I took a stroll around the area, the Love River and the Ambassador Hotel.

An alley.

One view of a Kaohsiung avenue.

Same avenue. I liked them both so much, I kept 'em both.

Posing under the tree-shaded walkway.

An artist sketches the Love River scenery.

The Ambassador Hotel, reddish-brown in the center.

An artists club was hard at work along the waterfront.

In the background is one of the tallest buildings in the world.

The Kaohsiung Cinema Museum. Because when you utter the word cinema, the first place everyone thinks of is of course, Kaohsiung.....

Tour boats passing by the fish-dragon.

Kaohsiung and the Love River, by day.....

....and by night, a year apart.

A policeman conducts traffic in the early morning in Taichung.

Once it was a stream fierce in the rainy season and fecund in the dry.

A betel nut seller's shack.

Cleaning up cut grass on at the Foreign Ministry Offices in Taichung.

I haven't had a chance to shoot many bugs this year. They don't seem to be around as much as they were last year after the rain. This tiny bug completely defeated my camera.

....of course, I haven't had much chance to hike lately....

Perfect camo.

Enjoying a snack.

A funeral snarls traffic in a local suburb.

Traffic in Tali

A street in eastern Taichung.

A betel nut girl prepares the nuts.

An old man guards the entrance to a nursing home in Taichung.

My daughter's school, the smallest in Taichung county, faces the inevitable demographic crunch. Not enough children go to the school, and it is in constant danger of losing the subsidies necessary to keep extra staff and to keep class sizes small. Despite the budget crunch, nevertheless, it found money to erect a sign nearby to recruit students. This generated much anger among the local parents.

A copy of the petition being circulated on a referendum for the national property stolen by the KMT during the era of one-party rule. My wife picked this up at her landlord's, where we had a long discussion about the previous regime. Her father had been a government worker, and had remained in a low post his whole life, because he wouldn't join the KMT.

[Taiwan] [Kaohsiung]

Fund raising and Volunteer Opps

Jerome Keating passed around news of opportunities to spend time and money on worthy causes:

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

Dear Friend,

(Please forward this e-mail to anyone who you think would like to come to this fundraising social event.)

a multi-dimensional happening at a new club-art-music-performance space (i.e. David's rooftop apartment)on the TienMu Riviera, Sat May 5, 2007

1) a donation of NT$500 to Animals Taiwan gets you free drinks all night: Beer, wine, gin, etc. with ice; All profits to AT
2) If you tell a joke, sing a song, perform a poem, tell a story, or do a skit, you get 100 back. Maximum two performances per person.
3) We are open to the sky and stars. Comfy seats, flush toilets and good conversation.
4) There will be dancing. You will dance! Great music.
5) Take a NT$70 cab ride from Zhishan MRT. Address: 6F, No.8, Lane 15, Yusheng Street (It's near a gas station on ZhiCheng Road.) You can call 0932 889 542 from the taxi to have a Chinese speaker talk to the driver. Or 0963 007 102 (Angela) or 0936 090 020 (Betty)
6) if rain, we go to The Pig & Whistle and/or Green Bar.
7) Live music is being arranged.

Please spread the word. Aiming for 30 to 100 people.

We forward to seeing you all there!

Contact: email davidbeattie2001@yahoo.com

++++++++++

#### Second.####


We have from Mark Wilkie on the environment and birds. There is a need for letter writing as regards the Hushan Dam.

From Mark,

We've got a blog up on the Hushan issue. It still needs a little fixing but it's up and running http://antihushandam.blogspot .com/. We're running a letter campaign.Things are hotting up on the Hushan issue. Last week the EPA subcommittee (Robin Winkler and co) ruled that all work on the Hushan Dam Project must stop. While this is indeed a victory the ruling will be referred to the EPA plenary committee and with all the political interference there, the ruling may well be overturned. As it is, the ruling of the subcommittee is nonbinding. There is an urgent need to give the government pressure over the issue at this time. Would you be able to help us with a letter and possibly spread the word a bit?

Best regards,

Mark

Hushan Dam, Letter of Concern
How to send:


Please write your own letter or cut and paste the following letter and add your name, location and organization( feel free to add your own comments), and email it to President Chen Shui-bian at: oop62@mail.oop.gov.tw , abian@mail.oop.gov.tw
and cc to the following:
eyemail@eyemail.gio.gov.tw , chairman@pfp.org.tw ,
ylhga001@mail.yunlin.gov.tw , ly10998a@ly.gov.tw ,
comment@wildatheart.org.tw , keephushanwild@gmail.com

cc recipients: Premier Su-Tseng-chang (Confirmation email will be sent--respond by clicking the left icon), People First Party Chairman James Soong, Yunlin County Commissioner Su Chih-fen,Taiwan Solidarity Union Legislator Yin Ling-ying, Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association, Taiwan National Coalition Against the Hushan Dam.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------

Letter of Concern

Re: The Hushan Dam Project
The President of the Republic of China,
President Chen Shui-bian.

Cc: Premier Su-Tseng-chang, People First Party Chairman James Soong, Yunlin County Commissioner Su Chih-fen,Taiwan Solidarity Union Legislator Yin Ling-ying, Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association, National Coalition Against the Hushan Dam.


Dear Sir,
I am writing to urge the cancellation of the proposed dam project at Hushan Village, Yunlin County, Taiwan.
If the dam is built, and the valley flooded, 422 hectares of rich evergreen forest will be submerged, destroying the breeding grounds of countless animal species, including the Fairy Pitta Pitta Nympha, which is listed as a vulnerable bird species by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), regulated under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), and listed as an endangered species in Taiwan.

The Huben-Hushan area is the world's most densely populated habitat of the migratory Fairy Pitta, and has been identified by the Wild Bird Federation Taiwan and BirdLife International as one of Taiwan's 53 IBAs or Important Bird Areas (Taiwan IBA: TW017). The area is also the permanent home to three other IUCN listed threatened wild bird species, namely, Taiwan Partridge Arborophila crudigularis, Swinhoe's Pheasant Lophura swinhoii, and Maroon Oriole Oriolus traillii ardens. 21 of Taiwan's 31 known frog species, and innumerable mammals, fish, reptiles and insects have all been recorded in the area. The loss of this area will therefore not only threaten populations of animals permanently resident in Taiwan, it will also have a negative impact on migrant bird species using Hushan as a vital breeding location and an important rest area as the journey along international flyways.

The failure by developers to include in their Environmental Impact Assessment important geological factors highlighted by the September 1999 earthquake also demonstrates serious noncompliance with Taiwan's environmental laws. Meanwhile, the project is designed to promote a form of industrial development that offers little to the ordinary people of Taiwan other than inequality in resource pricing and distribution, and enormous greenhouse gas emissions. The development of highly polluting industries on the Yunlin Coast would threaten birds in the nearby Dacheng Wetland IBA (Taiwan IBA: TW016) and increase the threat to the resident endangered Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin Sousa Chinensis.

The Hushan Dam site is also geologically unstable and subject to landslides and infiltration. The hillside areas around the reservoir are particularly vulnerable. Several active fault lines lie close to the dam, including the Chelongpu Fault, which caused the magnitude 7.3 earthquake in September 1999 and passes through the site of a weir only 5-6 km from the Hushan Dam. Also, sediment deposited after the earthquake is carried downstream in stormy weather, degrading water quality and vastly decreasing the potential lifespan of the dam. The failure to take into account geological changes resulting from this earthquake in the 2000 EIA not only violates Taiwan's EIA law, which requires analysis of local earthquake risks, it also makes this costly project a waste of public money and a potentially lethal structural hazard.

Although Taiwan has not yet become a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol, with annual CO2 emissions of over 276 million tons (22nd highest in the world), this is no excuse for more of the country's scarce water and forest resources to be sacrificed for such immense future greenhouse gas emitters as the Formosa Plastics steel plant and the Kuokuang Petrochemical oil refinery, which are to be supplied with water from the Hushan reservoir. This is also unacceptable as long as farmers and households in the same county continue to suffer from water pollution and shortages.

We would like to respectfully propose that the Government of Taiwan put an immediate stop to this project, in respect of national and international laws and principles of social and environmental justice. We suggest a thorough review of Taiwan's water resources policy, as well as a repeat EIA giving appropriate consideration to the issues mentioned above. We also advise careful analysis of the impacts on the Taiwan environment and society from such notorious polluters as those industries planned to benefit from this dam project.

Yours sincerely,
(Name)
(Location)
(Organization, if applicable)

+++++++++++

[Taiwan]

US Double Standard on the Taiwan weapons purchase

Veteran military correspondent Wendell Minnick chronicles accusations that the US has a double standard on the Taiwan weapons purchase:

Young also criticized Taiwan's recent announcement that it is developing a land-attack cruise missile (LACM) capable of hitting China."The United States feels that the focus should be on defensive, and not offensive, weapons. ... In fact, we think Taiwan should be placing its emphasis on, its missile defense," he said.

China has approximately 800 to 900 ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan, and defense analysts here argue that six batteries of PAC-3s will do little in the event of a saturation missile attack from China.

Local analysts are complaining that Young grumbles that Taiwan does not take defense seriously because it does not want to buy U.S.-made weapons, but at the same time criticizes its development of a LACM.

On the 'offensive missiles,' I have to say that Taiwan knows well regarding the utility of LACM and possible consequences in a contingency across the Strait, and the inability of the U.S. to stop or dissuade China's missile buildup," said Alexander Huang, a senior associate of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies who lives in Taipei.

"Taiwan's development of offensive capability, in addition to hardening and infrastructure protection, is one of the investments aiming to disrupting or complicating China's war planning," he said."The LACM may not be a provocation, but it can be seen as an indigenous effort in defense modernization, and a reflection of Taiwan's will in strengthening her homeland defense."

Arthur Ding, a cross-strait military affairs expert at the National Chengchi University, argues that Washington uses a double standard in Asia.

Ding points out that South Korea has offensive missiles and Washington does nothing about it.

"This is not the case for Taiwan, and this is why the U.S. is concerned over Taiwan's surface-to-surface missile program," he said."Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see if the U.S. really pressures Taiwan to terminate its surface-to-surface missile program. There is always a gap between 'statement' and 'deed.'"

The US position is gibberish. On one hand, it accuses Taipei of not wanting to buy US weapons and thus, not being serious about defense. On the other, it says Taipei is too serious about defense, for it is building "offensive" weapons. From yet another angle, it complains that Taiwan is building offensive weapons and that is bad, but then it is criticizing Taiwan for not buying US submarines, weapons that the US refused to sell Taiwan for twenty years because.....they were offensive weapons. And let's not forget: citing the legislature's intransigence on the arms purchase, the US has refused to sell requested (and needed) F-16s to Taiwan -- and then it accuses Taipei of not being serious about its own defense!

If any human held the US positions, it would immediately be put in a straitjacket.

[Taiwan] [China] [US] [arms purchase]

Economist Diary on Democracy in Taiwan and Hong Kong

My friend Walter passed me this link to an Economist diary about democracy in Taiwan and Hong Kong:

IT IS always good to find old acquaintances doing well. When I used to visit him in Taipei in the late 1980s and early 1990s Chiou I-jen seemed the epitome of Taiwanese radicalism. A long-haired, scruffy and rather intense young man, he would work out of the cramped, chaotic offices of the then newly-legal opposition Democratic Progressive Party, and he would shock me with the fervour of his pro-independence views—still, at that time, tantamount to sedition.

Today I call on him in the eerily empty caverns inside Taipei's massive red-brick presidential palace. He is the president’s secretary-general, having served previously as national security adviser, and he is a big behind-the-scenes figure in Taiwan's politics. People are gratifyingly impressed that he has spared time to talk to me.

He has spruced himself up these days, favouring elegant black suits with Chinese collars. He is more positive about China's role in Hong Kong than anyone else I have spoken to in Taipei, crediting China with making a big effort to show that "one country, two systems" works, partly as a means of putting pressure on Taiwan. The effort, however, is doomed. Taiwan's people, as he says, have only one question: "why do I need it?" Indeed, who wants a promise of autonomy if you are enjoying de facto independence? The Hong Kong model, he says, has failed to persuade Taiwan.

Long, well written, and full of interesting observations.

[Taiwan] [Hong Kong] [China] [Democracy] [DPP] [Taiwan Independence]

Lottery Lunacy

Taiwan's upcoming sports lottery was recently the subject of a planned tender by GTech, as the Taipei Times reported last week.

GTECH Corp, a US gaming solution provider, said yesterday it would team up with Taipei Fubon Bank (台北富邦銀行) to tender for the license to operate a planned sports lottery.

GTECH partnered with Taipei Fubon Bank through Lottery Technology Service Co (樂彩公司), a joint venture with Acer Inc, to distribute Public Welfare Lottery tickets from 2002 to last year.

Acer will not join the partnership for the sports lottery, as the world's fourth-largest PC vendor said it wants to focus on its core business, said Simon Chuang (莊俊元), account general manager of GTECH Global Services Corp's Taiwan branch.

"It is a challenge [to operate a sports wagering system ... We are uniquely positioned to provide this service," Robert Vincent, vice president of GTECH corporate communications, told a press conference yesterday in Taipei.

Sports wagering requires much more sophisticated technology than common lotteries, including setting the odds at appropriate levels -- which vary depending on the sport -- individual team performances, players and even the weather, Vincent said. It also carries more management risks for the operator, he added.

Declining to provide an estimate on the market size of sports betting because of the sensitive timing, Vincent said the market "will be substantial and rival other similar markets."

A sports lottery committee under the Cabinet said last week it will announce the requirements for the bid in the middle of next month and invite tenders in the following two months.

GTech is quite a fascinating little enterprise. The Wiki entry, clearly a simple uploading of a news article.....gives one pause.

But the history gets deeper and murkier. There are plenty of published news reports about GTECH scandals that the current GTECH management calls 'in the past'. Some notable items:

J. David Smith was GTECH's national sales director when he took almost $170,000 in kickbacks from lobbyists in New Jersey. In 1996, he was convicted of fraud and other charges that sent him to prison for five years. As a result of this the Texas lottery commission initiated an investigation after Smith's pre-sentence report implicated him in another kickback scheme with the company's Texas lobbyists. No charges were filed over the Texas allegations. But the Texas probe led to the 1997 firing of Texas Lottery Director Nora Linares after officials learned that a friend, whom she later married, had secretly worked as a $6,000-a-month GTECH consultant. Linares sued GTECH and the commission, claiming she had been fired for political reasons. In an out-of-court settlement, GTECH paid her $435,000, plus $290,000 for her lawyers. The company admitted no wrongdoing, and a short time later, Gtech -- despite the ongoing scandals -- got its contract renewed over two lower bidders.

In 1997, GTECH fired its chief lobbyist in Texas, a certain Mr. Ben Barnes. Here is how that tangled web was woven. Ben Barnes, a prominent Texas Democrat and a former speaker of the House in the state legislature, told friends he used his influence to get George W. Bush a guard slot after receiving a request from Houston oilman Sid Adger. Barnes said Adger told him he was calling on behalf of the elder George Herbert Walker Bush, then a Texas congressman.

Under investigation in Texas in 1997, GTECH fired Barnes, and paid him a $23 million severance, and GTECH was awarded the aforementioned contract. Linares' successor, Lawrence Littwin started an aggressive investigation but was fired in less than 5 months. Littwin also sued, claiming he was fired after looking into possibly illegal political contributions by GTECH via the $23 million severance to Barnes and that he was fired without just cause by Bush appointee Harriet Miers, in October 1997 after five months on the job. It contended that Gtech Corp., which ran the state lottery and until February 1997 employed Barnes as a lobbyist for more than $3 million a year, was responsible for Littwin's dismissal.

Littwin's lawyers suggested in court filings that Gtech was allowed to keep the lottery contract, which Littwin wanted to open up to competitive bidding, in return for Barnes's silence about Bush's entry into the Guard.

Barnes and his lawyers had denounced this "favor-repaid" theory in court pleadings as "preposterous . . . fantastic [and] fanciful." Littwin was fired after ordering a review of the campaign finance reports of various Texas politicians for any links to GTECH or other lottery contractors. But Littwin wasn't hired, or fired, until months after Barnes had severed his relationship with GTECH.

Littwin won a $300,000 settlement from GTECH, which included a confidentiality order as part of the deal. Littwin was fired by the then chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission, Harriet Miers. One of the reasons Miers backed off from her 2005 Supreme Court nomination was potential questions about her handling of GTECH and the Texas lottery.

Catch Harriest Miers' name in there? And George Bush's national guard slot? Life sure makes some funky connections....

[Taiwan]

Taiwan's Arms Purchase letter in the WSJ

Speaking of defense, here is Taiwan's official response to Ted Galen Carpenter's appalling outburst of rhetoric last week on the arms purchase. This is as it appeared, edited, in the Wall Street Journal earlier this week:

+++++++++++

Three Myths About Taiwan's Defense

In regard to Ted Galen Carpenter’s oped (“Taiwan’s Free Ride on U.S. Defense,” April 23): Mr. Carpenter perhaps unwittingly bought into three regrettable myths about my country’s defense situation.

The first is that Taiwan’s investment in its own defenses continues to shrink as China’s rises. While Taiwan’s own defense spending has indeed been outstripped by that of China’s own destabilizing double-digit growth in defense spending, Taiwan’s own military budget will actually grow from 2.2 % of GDP last year to a proposed 2.85 % this year and to 3.0 % in 2008. Furthermore, a November 2006 report by the U.S. Congressional Research Service found that from 1998 to 2005, Taiwan received $13.9 billion in arms deliveries from various sources, making it the third largest such recipient among developing countries.

It should also be noted that much of Taiwan’s defense budget has been spent on expensive military software that often costs even more than the missile hardware it purchases. One example of this trend is its 2004 purchase of Ultra High Frequency Long Range Early Warning Radars at the rather “un-free” cost of over $1.7 billion.

The second myth is that Taiwan seems intent on starting a shooting war with China through provocative policies. While many commentators seem content to repeat Beijing’s talking points about the “recklessness” of Taiwan’s government’s struggle to protect national sovereignty, few of them seem to have noted Taiwan’s genuine attempts to reach out to its cross-strait neighbor. These initiatives have included a suggested demilitarized zone along the middle of the Taiwan Strait, confidence building measures between both sides’ militaries to avoid miscalculation, and direct charter flights between the two sides. Despite being targeted by over 900 Chinese missiles, Taiwan has even recently begun to welcome large numbers of Chinese tourists to help build trust between our two peoples.

The third myth is that the implied assumption that the arms package currently stalled in the legislature would have been passed by now if Taiwan were still an authoritarian party-state. But long gone are the days when an authoritarian government in Taipei could pass laws by executive fiat regardless of political opposition. While the current stand-off over the arms bill is regrettable, it remains a testimony to Taiwan’s commitment to democracy that its government remains determined to pass the package according to constitutional law.

Make no mistake: Taiwan is a sovereign country fully committed to upholding both its defenses and democratic ideals. The stability and security that America brings to the region in the form of the sale of defensive armaments to its allies and its steadfast support for freedom sends a message to not only those in Beijing who would forcefully annex Taiwan, but to others who question America’s resolve to stand up for democracy overseas. Suggesting that it may be better to abandon Taiwan’s 23 million to the tender mercies of Beijing serves only to dilute this message and increases the chances of miscalculation.

Eddy Tsai
Director, Press Division
Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office
Washington, DC

++++++++

The letter also received some play in the local press, as the Taipei Times report on it. Apparently Carpenter's ill-informed remarks drew more than a little local ire. Well-deserved, I'd say.

[Taiwan] [China] [US] [arms purchase]

When will the US get serious about selling Taiwan weapons?

Yesterday AIT head Steve Young joined the ongoing parade of US officials criticizing the island for not buying US weapons....

The Legislative Yuan has been using a "series of domestic excuses" to explain away its inability to pass the arms procurement bill, a senior U.S. official in Taiwan said yesterday, stressing that both the opposition and the ruling parties on the island should be blamed for the impasse.

Director of the American Institute in Taiwan Stephen Young, at a press conference in Taipei, insinuated that Taiwan's continued reluctance to approve the multi-billion Taiwan dollar arms package offered by U.S. President George W. Bush six years ago in the face of protest from China, will lead other countries to think that Taiwan is not serious about its own defense.

The offer, made in 2001, includes six PAC III anti-missile systems, eight diesel-fueled submarines and 12 P-3C Orion anti-submarines aircraft.

Taiwan is not serious about its own defense? The number three arms importer in the world among developed nations for the last decade? One of America's biggest customers? Let's be real, please. This claim is absurd and needs to be dropped, because every single male on the island, who must serve in the military, can give it lie. No one can take such hyperbole seriously.

Last year Mr. Young laudably blamed the Blues for their intransigence on the arms issue, a position that several US officials have argued in the last two years. Regrettably that effort was not sustained. Several times Blue leaders, including Ma Ying-jeou, have promised to work to pass the legislation, only kill it in committee. The US has failed to (1) loudly attack Blue perfidy on this issue and (2) keep up unremitting pressure on the pro-China parties. That is one of the steps the US must take if it is serious about passing this bill.

The other step that must be taken -- and I have said it here a thousand times -- is that the US must face its intransigence on this issue. The US has refused to provide co-production opportunities to Taiwan, and it has refused to lower the insanely high price of the submarines. As long as the US refuses to do these things, supporters of the arms purchase will be sledding uphill trying to get other rational humans to accept this purchase. What rational legislator can embrace overspending on weapons when the entire sum creates not one job for his constituents? The real question is not when will Taiwan get serious? but when will the US get serious? about selling the weapons to Taiwan. At the moment, not a single senior US official or commentator except the redoubtable John Tkacik (may his whiskeys always be doubles!) has mentioned this problem. The parade of US officials ignoring our own problems has gone from distressing to grotesque.

Taiwan News further reported:

Young said he is "puzzled by the reticence" of the Taiwanese politicians, especially on a fundamental issue such as national security. He called on the ruling and the oppositions parties to "put aside the partisan differences and pass the (arms) budget" that politicians across the party spectrum have claimed they want to see effected.

Speaking about his recent trip to Washington D.C., he noted that Dennis Wilder, the senior director for East Asian Affairs on the White House National Security Council (國家安全會議), last week said that the U.S. does not support any move by the governments on either side of the strait to develop offensive weapons.

He said some media reports claimed that the U.S. had approved the use of long-ranged offensive missiles in the recent Huang Kuang military exercise. The reports even went as far as saying that the U.S. has offered to name the new system.

"I want say categorically, here, on behalf of the U.S. government that those stories are inaccurate," he stated. The U.S. does not and will not support the development of offensive arms on either side of the strait, but it would be the "right thing" for Taiwan to boost its own defense system, he stressed.

Fascinating. The US doesn't support the development of offensive arms by either side -- yet it supports the acquisition of submarines by Taiwan, weapons which the US refused to sell to Taiwan over two decades of requests by the island....because they were offensive weapons.

Yep, it is easy to see why Steve Young is puzzled.

Is the US serious about selling weapons to Taiwan? Not yet, apparently.

[Taiwan] [China] [US] [submarines] [arms purchase]

Psalmanazar at DKos, WHO Entry

The first Taiwanese in Europe, Psalmanazar, blogs at DailyKos on the problem of press freedom and the UN on World Press Freedom Day:

The practice of denying Taiwan’s professional journalists press accreditation to the World Health Assembly began in 2004, when the United Nation’s Geneva Office took over responsibility for handling the media for the event. It is ironic that before 2004 the WHO saw absolutely no problem in handing out press passes to Taiwan’s professional journalists to cover the WHA meeting while it continued to deny their country of origin the right to similarly observe that event.

But in May 2004 the UN’s Geneva office suddenly decreed that only journalists who could produce a passport from a country recognized by the UN and another form of photo ID would receive accreditation, a decision that effectively barred the majority of Taiwanese journalists because the UN doesn’t recognize Taiwan nor the rights of its 23 million citizens. That year only two Taiwanese journalists were given press credentials, and this was only because they happened to possess American and British passports. When asked about the sudden reversal in policy, chief of the Geneva office’s press and external relations section said that the UN doesn’t recognize Taiwan as a state and that the reporters’ Taiwan passports were merely “local passports”.

The UN’s decision to deny Taiwanese journalists accreditation raises two troubling questions. The first deals with Taiwan’s ability and right to receive timely information pertaining to the health of its citizens. Once again we can turn to the WHO’s own charter to see that keeping Taiwan out of the information loop is against the spirit, if not the letter of the WHO’s stated commitment to health. The constitution’s preface states that “[i]nformed opinion and active cooperation on the part of the public are of the utmost importance in the improvement of the health of the people.” As I discussed in my last entry, the Taiwan government’s ability to communicate and share data with the WHO continues to be degraded by the month. As bad as this is, the argument could be made that these communications could also be made via other channels like the media. The Geneva office’s decision to deny Taiwan’s reporters access to the WHA and its policy-planning sessions closes that remaining channel, leaving Taiwan dependent on second- or third-hand information about these meetings and unable to form the very “informed opinions” on public health that the WHO hopes to provide the world’s people.

The diary coincides with a renewed drive by Taiwan's foreign ministry to enter the WHO. The GIO unveiled a new ad yesterday:

The Government Information Office (GIO) yesterday unveiled a new advertisement to promote the nation's bid to participate in the WHO.

On the advertisement, WHO is written as "WHC," with the "C" representing an incomplete "O" to deliver the message that as Taiwan is not yet a member, the organization is not complete.

"As you can see, on the advertisement, WHO is written as `WHC' because Taiwan is not in the organization so the `O' is not complete," GIO deputy minister William Yih (易榮宗) said.

The WHO Secretariat rejected Taiwan's latest bid to participate in the organization on April 25 after President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) sent a letter on April 11 to WHO Director-General Margaret Chan (陳馮富珍) asking that the country be allowed to join the health body.

There was also a small demonstration in front of the American Institute in Taiwan, hoping to attract US support for the island's WHO bid.

[Taiwan] [China] [US] [WHO] [UN]

Richard Bush on Taiwan

Richard Bush, a prominent US analyst and official who specializes in Taiwan, and Michael O'Hanlon, offer a commentary in the Washington Times on recent issues (both are now at Brookings). This piece is different from most of the other stuff on Taiwan by US-based commentators. It is remarkably level-headed and balanced, and exhibits actual understanding of events on Taiwan. The money paragraph:

The chances of imminent war over Taiwan are not high. But after a calm couple of years, current events between China and Taiwan are developing in a way that makes us worry the potential for conflict remains.

Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian, in order to keep his party in power after the presidential election next March, is playing up sovereignty themes. China is getting pretty paranoid. It worries that when Mr. Chen says he wants to promote Taiwan's "sovereignty" through a new constitution and greater stature in the world community, he really wants full independence. Although the objective odds of Mr. Chen actually changing Taiwan's legal identity in a way that challenges China's fundamental interests are pretty low, Beijing is imagining all the ways Mr. Chen can pull an independence rabbit out of his hat. China is trying to convince Washington of the danger, but the Bush administration has apparently not responded as robustly as Beijing would like it to restrain Mr. Chen. Ingredients for miscalculation exist.

Bush and O'Hanlon realize that (1) President Chen can't declare independence (2) Chen's sovereignty talk is largely aimed at his domestic political base (3) China, not Taiwan, is the problem. Pretty good stuff. The piece also appeared the previous day in the Daily Yomiuri in Japan.

[Taiwan] [China] [US] [WHO] [Olympics]

Taiwan Impacting US-China Military Relationship

Wendell Minnick, the Taipei-based military reporter and commentator, had an article in Defense News on the 30th discussing how the US military and China's military are trying to find ways to build bridges to each other....but then there's Taiwan...

“China says it might use force under certain circumstances, and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is clearly making military preparations in case they have to,” Blair said. “U.S. policy under the Taiwan Relations Act is to oppose the use of force, and Pacific Command and U.S. military forces have a responsibility to make military preparations to do that. So the military forces on both sides are both getting ready to fight each other if necessary.”

This tension has made it difficult for Chinese and U.S. military officials to have a serious dialogue on anything other than Taiwan.

“When U.S. and Chinese military officers get together, there is this really big issue of Taiwan in the middle of the conversation,” Blair said. “I have these conversations with the Chinese in which they say Taiwanese splittism is the greatest threat to peace, but I tell them that Chinese impatience is also a pretty big threat to peace.”

He acknowledged that military officers who get together are “try-ing to get a feeling for what kind of a military opponent the other side will be. ... We might be shooting at each other soon. So what else do we have to talk about except that? And how do we talk about that without giving away secrets?

“The approach I try to take is to be honest about the military realities. The PLA cannot take Taiwan now, and if Taiwan keeps working on its skills and puts some resources into its defense budget and the U.S. keeps up military development, that military reality is not going to change ... We don’t need to impress each other about how tough we are on the Taiwan issue — let’s put this issue in a box and talk about other issues where we have common interests.”

John Tkacik, as usual, took no prisoners:

We must remember that Chinese armies since the time of Sun Tzu in the fifth century B.C. have never put any stock in ‘confidence building’ — except as a deception tactic,” he said. “Chinese strategy relies on minimizing an adversary’s confidence. The PLA has not yet gotten to the point where they want to be predictable when dealing with the U.S. They like as much uncertainty as possible because it supports an overall military doctrine to leverage surprise and deception on the battlefield.”

Tkacik warned that China is taking advantage of wishful thinking at the Pentagon.

“If the Pentagon believes that, somehow, PLA ‘intentions’ will become more transparent simply because generals in Washington have shaken hands with a few generals in Beijing, they are delusional,” he said. “The Chinese army will improve mil-mil exchanges when they feel like it, but of course, they are happy to take any gifts the Pentagon or U.S. field commanders might offer.”

Hopefully the US can keep China convinced it is not in their interests to move against Taiwan....

[Taiwan] [China] [US]

RAND Corporation: China Could Defeat US

Last month the RAND corporation, a well-known US think tank, released a major report on China's ability to counter the US in a military confrontation. This document takes a more pessimistic view than US military declarations on the results of a US-China war. Rand's introductory summary notes:

A RAND Project AIR FORCE (PAF) study of Chinese military doctrinal writings finds that China could employ several types of antiaccess strategies in a future conflict with the United States, including

• pressuring such countries as Japan to limit or deny the United States the use of forward bases
• striking or jamming information systems to delay the deployment of U.S. military forces or to deny the United States access to information on enemy whereabouts
• disrupting U.S. logistics systems, thereby preventing the timely delivery of supplies and delaying the arrival of additional forces
• attacking air bases and ports to prevent or disrupt the deployment of forces and materiel
• attacking naval assets, such as aircraft carriers, to limit the United States’ ability to launch aircraft from the sea.

These actions could result in defeat for the United States — not in the sense that U.S. military forces would be destroyed but in the sense that China would accomplish its military and political objectives while preventing the United States from accomplishing some or all of its objectives.

An article on the report described it thusly:

Among China's options, the report said, was pressuring Japan and other Asian allies to deny the United States the use of bases on their territory in a conflict. China could also jam U.S. communications and computers, disrupt logistics and attack air bases to prevent supplies to the military.

"The Chinese People's Liberation Army is well aware of its own shortcomings and the United States' military superiority," Cliff said. "Instead of engaging U.S. forces head-on, they would attempt to take advantage of what they perceive to be American weaknesses, including the need to deploy and operate forces thousands of miles from home."

The Rand study differed from others by and for the Pentagon regarding Chinese strategy. Unlike previous studies, Rand examined Chinese military publications to determine Beijing's anti-access options. This contrasted with previous studies that relied on "mirror imaging" techniques, in which U.S. analysts imagined a Chinese offensive.

The report, commissioned by the US, then goes on to recommend steps the US military can take to counter the Chinese moves.

Taiwan's military staged a simulation last month that showed that Taiwan would rain missiles on China and stave off a Chinese victory. A nice thought, but no missiles have been deployed -- the simulation discussed the situation in 2012. Taiwan is currently developing cruise missiles with a roughly 600 km range, according to recent reports.

[Taiwan] [China] [US]

HSR Fans: HSR on Playstation

Yes, if you love Playstation and the High Speed Rail, it will arrive......

*A new Ongakukan Train Simulator for Playstation 3, featuring Taiwan High Speed Rail's Shinkansen service is currently being developed under the title, Railfan: Taiwan High Speed Rail.

*A Taiwanese software developer Actainment Co, will co-develop the game with Ongakukan.

*For the first time in Ongakukan history, the game will only be released in Asia. Minoru Mukaiya announced that the game will not be released in Japan for the time being.

[Taiwan] [HSR]

Racist Collectibles? Made in Taiwan

Alternet discusses how racism is alive and well in the collectibles market, with a little help from Taiwan...

That may be, but it's no mistake that swapping, selling and collecting a huge array of racist furnishings and home decorative pieces is a brisk and lucrative business. These items adorn thousands of American homes. There's a Coon Chicken Inn dinner plate, and a little Black Sambo block. They sell for hundreds of dollars. An original Aunt Jemima Cookie Jar can net upwards of $2,000. There are hundreds of counterfeits on the market. They sell for only a few dollars. The original Jolly Nigger Bank made in the early 1900s sells for hundreds of dollars at auctions. Even the hundreds of fakes of this grotesque little item are sold at swap meets and on the Internet for a few dollars.

Then there's the Sambo Dart Board. The All Metals Products Company, an outfit out of Michigan, originally made it in 1940. Fifty years later the AAA Sign Company in Ohio reproduces the Dart Board as a decorative tin sign and mass markets it at about $15 dollars. AAA Sign also makes, and sells, hundreds of wall clocks, ashtrays, and plates emblazoned with choice depictions of Sambos, Mammies, Toms and Coons. There's more than one kitchen where the cook lights up their stove with matches from matchboxes that have Nigger Head shrimp, Nigger Head oysters, and Mammy Brand oranges on the box cover.

The sale in racist furnishings is so good that many other countries have jumped into the business. Fake Jolly N[igger] Banks, for instance, are made in Taiwan exclusively for the American market....

Yeesh.

[Taiwan]

EU Parliamentarian Says Taiwan should beef up its defense

Taiwan's parliament was informed again that it should purchase weapons.....

A European parliamentarian urged Taiwan yesterday to bolster its defense capabilities while acknowledging that the EU would not intervene militarily should China attempt to take Taiwan by force because it would be outside Europe's regional security responsibility.

Dr. Georg Jarzembowski, the head of the Taiwan Friendship Group of the European Parliament, said Taiwan needed to act in procuring weapons to defend itself to be taken seriously on security issues in the rest of the world.

"If the people of Taiwan feel threatened by 900 missiles across the Straits, people from the outside would say what are the Taiwanese doing to defend themselves," Jarzembowski said. "Then you would wonder how long it takes until the (Taiwan's) parliament takes a decision on these questions."

Jarzembowski has long been a Taiwan advocate and more power to him. We need people to advocate for Taiwan in Europe. But it would behoove the good Dr. Jarzembowski to put some study into the issues. Taiwan is quite serious about procuring arms from abroad, being generally among the top five arms importers among the world's developed nations. I wish Taiwan's friends would instead focus on the real issue: the perfidious behavior of the pro-China side, with perhaps a nod to the problems the US has created as well. If you're going to hack on Taiwan, at least direct your hacks at something useful.

One long-term goal of the pro-China side is to drive a wedge between the West and Taiwan, and especially, between the West and the pro-Taiwan parties. Each time someone outside of Taiwan blames "Taiwan" for the arms purchase impasse, this strategy is rewarded. Time to pinpoint our attacks on the source of the problem, instead of on some abstraction called "Taiwan."

[Taiwan] [China] [US] [submarines] [arms purchase] [European Union]