Taiwan to seek Aegis destroyers

Several world media outlets are reporting that Taiwan is sending representatives next month to the US to purchase Aegis destroyers....

Taiwan wants to buy at least six Aegis-equipped destroyers from the United States at a cost of more than $4.6 billion, a newspaper said on Monday, a plan sure to anger China which claims the island as its own.

The United Daily News quoted unnamed sources as saying Deputy Defense Minister Ko Cheng-heng and Chief of the General Staff Chen Yung-kang would travel to the United States this month to try to secure the deal.

The defense ministry declined to comment.

The navy could eventually buy an additional two destroyers after the initial six depending on the circumstances, the newspaper said.

The Aegis air defense radar and weapons system is capable of tracking and attacking dozens of missiles, aircraft and ships all at once.

The United States, the island's main arms supplier, in 2001 put off a request from Taipei to buy four Arleigh Burke-class destroyers equipped with the Aegis system, but kept the option open should China pose a sufficient threat.

Taiwan has long pursued Aegis destroyers, but the US has been reluctant to sell them to the island, believing that it doesn't have the capacity to operate them. The article goes on to discuss the current arms imbroglio.

But Washington has become increasingly frustrated by Taiwan lawmakers' long delay in passing a budget to buy key weapons platforms.

The presentation follows the usual pattern: Washington's own role in creating the issue is never mentioned, and the fact that it is the KMT that is blocking the package is never mentioned as well.

The presentation on China's claim to Taiwan is a bit schizo:

China has claimed sovereignty over self-ruled Taiwan since the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949. Beijing has vowed to bring the island back under mainland rule, by force if necessary.

The first sentence is a very nice formulation of the issue, progress on that front. But the second sentence is wrong; the island was never entirely under "mainland" rule -- certainly not by any Chinese emperor prior to the Manchus -- and thus the word "back" is arguable.

[Taiwan] [US] [China]

Chunghwa Telecom Union to Launch Worker's Party?

The China Post is reporting that workers at Chunghwa Telecom may form a new workers' party....

The Chunghwa Telecom Workers' Union (CTWU) may team up with other industrial workers unions to organize a new political party and field its own candidates in the next legislative election, CTWU Chairman Chang Hsu-chung said yesterday.

In a recent CTWU board of directors meeting, Chang was appointed to establish a new political party for the purpose of representing members of all workers' unions around the country, including teachers' unions, in the legislature.

According to Chang, members of national federations of different industries from around the island, as well as the CTWU and the Formosa Plastics Workers' Union, met July 19 for a preparatory meeting to form what is tentatively called the "Workers Solidarity Union." Chang stressed that it is still too early to confirm whether the current party name will hold. Another possibility is the "Third Force Reform Union."

Representatives from each union are expected to meet again on August 21 when the party might be formally established, said Chang.

Regardless of the name, the workers' party will make it easier for workers to advance and protect their rights and interests. Once established, the party will campaign for a nationwide referendum to add a workers' version of the annuity policy to Executive Yuan's current annuity policy, ban dispatch workers, and guarantee stabilized employment opportunities, Chang remarked.

Chang confirmed that the workers party has received NT$10 million in funding, which is enough for the party to field 10 of its members in the next legislative election slated for Jan. 12, 2008.

Political analysts said the prospective workers' party could potentially control substantial political sway if Taiwan's 8.6 million workers join its ranks.

Chen Jie, a Changhua County legislator, said that establishing a party "is no easy task and will take some time." He added that he welcomed and encouraged its establishment if the party is to be formed in the interest of workers by increasing their rights and benefits.

A letter about the profitability of CHT, layoffs, and other issues from the CWTU Director Chang is online here; it will give you a feel for.....something.. A-gu notes that the new party is already sending feelers to the Farmer's Party -- but the Farmer's Party is run by a longtime pro-Blue hack. I'm curious to see where this goes....

The Taiwan Review has a great article on the whole unions vs. privatization issue. The government's policy is frankly anti-union (emphasis mine):

Tung and his members are worried that such uncertainty will have an adverse effect on staff morale, which in turn could blight the island's power supply, thus slowing economic development. The TPWU is accordingly looking for ways to per suade the government to put the program on hold, pending a review of the results of previous privatizations. "We hope to provide government authorities with practical analyses, based on our years of experience," Tung says. "We are also pushing for the right to participate in the CEPD's screening process, which will determine the ultimate content of the privatization package."

So far, however, the union is not having much luck. Instead, the CEPD has commissioned academics and consultants to map out what Tung describes as an impractical plan riddled with problems. He says flatly that he does not hold out much hope for the future of Taipower after it is privatized. "The result will be a mixture of layoffs and wage cuts."

Again, this is hardly how CEPD Vice Chairman Chi Schive sees it. He is frankly dismissive of the notion that union leaders should be invited to participate in the CEPD-organized screening process. "Unions ought to be talking about privati zation with management on the company's premises, where company policy is formulated," he contends. "But when dealing with the outside world, it's the directors of the company who have to represent its interests and those of its employees."

In accordance with this policy, the CEPD invites only presidents and chief executive officers to attend its planning meetings. "The council is in no position to debate privatization policy with union leaders, because the government has already laid down what that policy is to be," Schive says. "The relevant debates will take place in the legislature and will involve both the executive and the legislative branches. We have to go by the standard procedures. The alternative is chaos."

What the CEPD is prepared to do is continue its existing dialogue with union leaders and the employees they represent as a means of educating them about the ways in which privatization can benefit the work force. The relevant statutory framework actually entitles them to preferential treatment, rather than the reverse, and with a view to emphasizing this, the council has organized several seminars in recent months at which union leaders and SOE employees have been urged to express their concerns. Despite opposition from some labor unions, Schive believes that many employees support privatization, because they recognize that it is for the good of Taiwan's industrial environment as a whole, quite apart from benefiting individual enterprises.

Despite this, Tung is resolute in his hostility to privatization. Any union in the power-generation industry has a number of tricks up its sleeve, and the TPWU is no exception. "We have about 30,000 mem-bers, or 97.8 percent of the Taipower work force," he points out. "We don't rule out the possibility of large-scale protests."

Chi Schive is a local establishment academic with a long history of writing on Taiwan's industrialization and foreign direct investment.

Many of the island's government workers, in addition to being concerned about layoffs, and about the employment situation and stagnant incomes, are also upset about the loss of preferential 18% interest rates on their savings. One reason the bureaucracy supported the KMT is that they received enormous bribes in the form of unreal interest rates (as well as those special funds that got Ma Ying-jeou and Chen Shui-bian in so much trouble) -- interests rates that taxpayers outside the government regarded as theft. Because unions in Taiwan are so weak, one viable solution is a political party that would look out for their interests. If it is really such a party, and not just another faction supporting someone's dreams of power, or Blue or Green sham, it would be an important step forward for the island.

[Taiwan]

Daily Links, August 6, 2007

You're not seeing double. I just couldn't decide which cut I liked better, so you get 'em both. And a bonus wolf spider hiding in there too, just to the left of the butterfly.

It's Monday, so the Daily Taiwan Links are at David's Place! Bent has links. And more links! Kerim has a pile of them from the Wikipedia conference, spread over several posts. Sorry, no links, all we got here is critters....

These beautiful spiders with their complex carapaces and tiny size never cease to amaze me. I hope you enjoy this one as much as I do.

Many times I've tried to capture one of these tiny green caterpillars spinning in the air.

[Taiwan] [spiders]

Chicago Trib on our 7-11 Culture

The Letter from Taipei in the Trib yesterday discussed Taiwan's 7-11 life:

From the intersection of Zhongshan and Zhongxiao Roads in Taiwan's bustling capital, you can spot at least four 7-Eleven stores as you turn north, south, east and west. No joke.

And while this corner may fall on the high end of the island's 7-Eleven density spectrum, the cluster of identical stores fazes no one. With about 23 million people and more than 4,400 7-Elevens, Taiwan boasts the highest per capita number of these all-night convenience stores in the world.

The saturation is not lost on locals, who are quick to quote a not-so-ancient Taiwanese expression meaning something like: "There's always a 7-Eleven around the next corner."

In Taipei, this is no exaggeration. Scan the horizon in just about any of the capital's neighborhoods and you'll spot the familiar orange, green and red stripes that have become the near-universal symbol for all-night shopping, icy drinks and rolling hot dogs. In Taiwan, however, they herald a lot more.

Lot more there.

[Taiwan]

The Buffet Place

The buffet place. There's one on every corner selling simple food at good prices. Come to the place where everyone eats lunch....

Taking aim at the dishes.

Who doesn't love fatty pork?

Above, up close and personal.

Large Chinese sausage slices.

Broccoli. Simple but delicious.

Deep fried and sauced: it's how meat should be.

I love eggplant.

Because you can never have too many fried foods.

Chicken.

A popular bean dish.

Pork.

Mashed taro topped with Taiwan's favorite condiment.

Various boiled chicken dishes are a common sight.

Egg, tofu, or radish is often made into cakes like this. Here it is egg.

The lowly pork chop is Taiwan's staple food.

Cuttlefish.

Fish slices.

Little fish are a great favorite of the locals.

Preserved egg with tofu, a ubiquitous side dish.

Traditional Chinese McNuggets.

Deep fried and stuff with seafood.

Boiled pork, sliced and sauced.

Bonito flakes atop bean sprouts.

Eggs are another staple of local cuisine.

Cod or one of several substitute fish.

The diversity of fungi available in Taiwan is always amazing.

Tofu skins, one of my favorites.

Bean thread noodles.

Stewed fatty pork.

Calgary apples? No, just squid balls.

Taiwan style meatloaf.

Fried chicken, an Asian favorite.

Seaweed.

A small cooking area for deep frying.

Don't forget the free soup!

When you're done, the leftovers go into the recycler for pig slops, and the dishes and chopsticks into the trash for recycling.

[Taiwan] [Chinese Food]

Hsieh Interview, Financial Times

A Financial Times interview with Frank Hsieh, by Kathrin Hille, whom I've long considered to be a pro-KMT journalist. Hille sets up several questions hoping to provoke an answer she can use to discredit him, but Hsieh is an old hand at evading these traps.

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

Frank Hsieh, presidential candidate of Taiwan's ruling Democratic Progressive Party, is on a trip to the United States, Taiwan's most important unofficial ally. Ahead of meetings with US administration officials beginning Monday, Mr Hsieh spoke to Kathrin Hille, the FT’s Taipei Correspondent. The following is an edited transcript of the interview.

Financial Times: Mr Hsieh, you will be meeting several US administration officials over the coming few days who will be eager to get an idea of what to expect from you. As what kind of politician do you want to present yourself? What can America expect from you?

Frank Hsieh: I think we need to let our partners in the US know that we can be a trustworthy, reliable partner. There may be some doubt in America over the trustworthiness of some politicians in Taiwan. For example, [Kuomintang presidential candidate] Ma Ying-jeou made certain promises to the United States with regard to the long-delayed planned arms procurement package, but later failed to live up to these promises.

We must be sincere, and our actions must match our words. If we promise something, we should stick to our promises. But also, we should not promise things we can’t deliver.

Moreover, we want to let the US know two things: First, that the existence of the Taiwanese democracy is very important in the world. And second, that we consider our partnership with the United States a very important one, a strategic one. And in such a partnership, the interests and concerns of our partner need to be given consideration and be respected. Vice versa, it should also be noted that Taiwan has its interests and concerns, too.

FT: Just as you left Taiwan for New York, president Chen Shui-bian announced that he has sent a letter to the UN secretariat applying for membership for Taiwan under its own name. It seems that now you’ll be forced to discuss these issues in your conversations with US administration officials. How will you explain to the US government this move and the plan to launch a referendum on such membership? [MT: note the use of the word forced. Hille's thesis of late has been that the "radical" DPP was out to control Hsieh and prevent him from being a "moderate." The question is totally loaded, intended to provoke an answer that she can use to say the DPP is divided. Fortunately Hsieh is smarter than that.]

Hsieh: Well, there are several levels on which this issue needs to be considered. First, we need to answer the question whether in a good partnership, should Taiwan have told the US about its plans first? Is the problem perhaps partly that the US does not like to be surprised like this?

Next, we need to find out what exactly the United States’ concerns are directed at. Are they opposed to Taiwan joining the UN? Or do they object to Taiwan joining the UN under the name Taiwan? Or is it the referendum they don’t like? Or is it maybe that they think the referendum will run counter to the Four Nos? Perhaps they think that in a good partnership, it’s not enough that we state that our plan is not in violation of the Four Nos, but they want their views to be considered.

But frankly, I don’t think asking me questions about Chen Shui-bian’s policies will be what the people I’m meeting will be focused on. I think they know …

Also, frankly, this whole UN business is not such a big issue because it should not stir up real tension with China. They should not be nervous, because they control the UN. They are in the Security Council.

FT: You have mentioned the “Four Nos”. Are you ready to reaffirm them, or to make a new kind of promise?

Hsieh: The basic principle is that you should not promise what you cannot deliver. So you should not make commitments rashly. But what you have promised you need to stick to. But really, I don’t think that America will pressure me into making any new promises.

FT: What will be your priority issues in government if you are elected president?

Hsieh: Number one, getting majority support in parliament. Number two, how to re-start dialogue with China. And number three, mend relations with the United States and repair mutual trust.

Without a majority in parliament, we cannot accomplish anything. Some of the problems in our ties with the US, the arms procurement in particular, have actually also had to do with the fact that we don’t have a legislative majority now.

Restarting dialogue with China should not be that difficult. Actually, we are having some dialogue now, but that’s all too technical and too low-level. I mean, if you really think that it is one of the most important things to restart dialogue, you will make every effort to make that happen.

FT: There is been a lot of pressure from part of your party’s support base to pursue the goal to make Taiwan a “normal country”. Will issues like a new constitution or changing monikers to ‘Taiwan’ be high up on your agenda?

Hsieh: That is why I have said getting a legislative majority is a priority. It is useless to say that the normalisation of the country is a priority issue if I lack the means to pursue it. You need a three-fourths majority in the legislature for constitutional reform.

My belief is that party politics will normalise in Taiwan, and through that process we will become a normal country. Currently, we have two parties, one of which identifies with Taiwan, and the other, the Kuomintang, to some extent with China.

The KMT’s name [Chinese Nationalist Party] and its platform, which includes the long-term goal of eventual unification, show that it does not, or not primarily, identify with Taiwan. If I win the election, that will change. They will have an internal debate and remake themselves to identify with Taiwan, including changing their name.

Then, in the future, a change of ruling party will no longer bear the risk of a change in sovereignty, because then we will have two parties that have differences within one country, and not one that identifies partly with another country. Then we can discuss the economy, discuss left and right.

And then we will also be in better shape to talk to China – united internally, with one voice.

FT: But aren’t there also problems within the Democratic Progressive Party? It includes a very broad spectrum of views ranging from moderate positions to pretty radical pro-independence demands. Chen Shui-bian has dealt with this by responding to different demands in turn, but he has increasingly followed the demands of the more radical pro-independence lobby. How will you deal with this problem, and will your style differ from his? [MT: Mad Chen the pro-independence radical makes his appearance. *Sigh*]

Hsieh: The DPP does have different [factions], but we all agree on the final goal. We just have disagreements about the steps that should be taken to get there.

I believe that the DPP’s Resolution on Taiwan’s Future sufficiently addresses the issue of the final goal for the time being. Other steps are redundant right now.

One should clearly distinguish between an election platform with campaign issues, a government agenda for a four-year presidential term, and a final goal. These things have been mixed up with each other. I would not do that. I would not take the final goal and make it an election issue all the time.

I am a pragmatist. Or you could say I am an idealist who starts out from a pragmatic point of view.

FT: You have not mentioned the economy in your priority government agenda. What would be your most important economic policies if elected president?

Hsieh: Taiwan’s economy needs very clear industrial policies and very clear energy policies. I think we should try very hard to keep small and medium-sized enterprises as the motor of our economy. If we expose Taiwan to the free market without any restrictions, our high-tech sector would continue to grow, and our GDP would continue to grow. But unemployment would rise, the elderly would become even more challenged in finding jobs and adjusting, and our domestic confidence might be shaken even more severely.

FT: You might be sending an alarming message to the international business community if you qualify Taiwan’s commitment to the principles of a free market economy …[MT: There's a hilarious myth that Taiwan has a 'free market' economy. Note how Hille here is fishing for something to exploit against Hsieh.]

Hsieh: No, free trade can continue without doubt. What I meant was that economic growth is not everything we should be worried about. We need to simultaneously consider social justice, the environment, sustainability.

FT: But what are Taiwan’s structural challenges? Taiwan’s economy has been growing at a slower pace than neighbouring countries with a similar level of economic development, such as Singapore, Hong Kong, or South Korea.

Hsieh: Well, Korea is growing faster than Taiwan, but they also have their problems. Our problem is politics. We have issues with political stability.

FT: What role should China play in Taiwan’s economic development? Are you in favour of lifting some of the restrictions on closer economic links with China, such as the ceiling that limits mainland investments of Taiwanese companies to 40 per cent of their net worth?

Hsieh: I believe that the principle of control is right. But the question is who should set the standards and review the details of the regulations. I believe that in many cases this decision should be left to experts from the industry. For example, the question whether chip companies should be allowed to invest in China in process technologies newer than 0.18 micron is clearly something only experts understand.

(taken from here)

[Taiwan] [Frank Hsieh] [media]

FAPA Letter/Press Release on UN Entry

Gerrit van Der Wees at FAPA sent this around:

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

The Formosan Association for Public Affairs 552 7th Street. SE. Washington,
DC 20003

Support Democracy, Support Taiwan.

_____

For Immediate Release

Contact Iris Ho @ 202.547.3686

August 3, 2007

FAPA PROTESTS UN SECRETARY GENERAL's STANCE ON TAIWAN

On August 3rd 2007, the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) sent a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to strongly protest his decision not to relay Taiwan's request for admission to the General Assembly and the Security Council. The Association in particular criticized Mr. Ban's argument that under General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971, the UN considers "that Taiwan is part of China."

The Association refers to the full text of the Resolution, and shows that it doesn't even refer to "Taiwan." In the letter, it explains that the issue in 1971 was "which government represented China", the Chinese Nationalists of Chiang Kai-shek or the government of the PRC in Beijing. FAPA states that the "representatives of Chiang Kai-shek" were not expelled because they represented Taiwan, but that ". they were expelled because they claimed to represent China."

FAPA goes on to state that the status of Taiwan should be determined in accordance with the decisions of the 1951-52 San Francisco Peace Treaty, when it was decided that Japan would cede sovereignty over Taiwan, and delegates expressed the view that the island's future would be decided according to the principles laid down in the Charter of the UN, i.e. self-determination.

The letter states that the DPP government of Chen Shui-bian clearly reflected the wishes of the large majority of the people in Taiwan when it submitted its application for Taiwan membership. The Association urges Mr. Ban to "live up to the basic principles of human rights, democracy and self-determination" and help facilitate entry of Taiwan into the UN. It argues that the Taiwanese people have "worked long and hard for their democracy, freedom, and independence" and that peace can only be secured if the island "gains a full and equal place among the international family of nations.

FAPA is a grass-roots organization of Taiwanese Americans. It has 56 chapters across the United States, and has as its goal to "promote international support for the right op the people of Taiwan to establish an independent and democratic country, and to join the international community."

H.E. Ban Ki-moon

Secretary-General

United Nations

New York NY 10017 USA
Washington, August 3rd 2007

Your Excellency,

As an organization of Americans of Taiwanese descent, we take strong exception to your decision not to relay the request to admission of Taiwan as a member of the United Nations -- submitted by the democratically- elected government in Taiwan led by President Chen Shui-bian -- to the General Assembly and the Security Council.

In particular, we reject your argument that under General Assembly Resolution 2758, the UN took the position "that Taiwan is part of China." This is contrary to the facts: if you read Resolution 2758 carefully (see attachment no. 1), you will see that it doesn't even mention Taiwan. The issue under consideration in Resolution 2758 was which government represented China. Until that time, the Chinese Nationalists had represented China, and their seat was granted to the government of the PRC in Beijing.

The fundamental flaw in your argument is that you equate the "representatives of Chiang Kai-shek" with Taiwan. But Chiang and his representatives were not expelled in 1971 because they represented Taiwan, they were expelled because they claimed to represent China. They did not represent the Taiwanese in any fashion: the island was under martial law from 1949 until 1987. Note that after the democratic transition in Taiwan in the late 1980s early 1990s, they were also expelled from office in Taiwan -- through democratic elections.

On Taiwan's status, there is a much earlier (and more important) international document, the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951-52, in which Japan formally ceded sovereignty over Taiwan. Delegates at the San Francisco conference voiced the opinion that the status of Taiwan needed to be determined "in due time, in accord with the purposes and principles as laid down in the Charter of the UN" (i.e. self-determination).

Taiwan now has a democratic government, led by the Democratic Progressive Party of President Chen Shui-bian. This government clearly reflected the wishes of the large majority of the people on the island when it submitted its application for UN membership to you on July 19th 2007.

If the United Nations wants to be a truly "universal" organization, it needs to take Taiwan's application seriously. Article 1.2 of the Charter of the United Nations states that it is the purpose of the UN:

"To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;"

Taiwan is a democratic nation: it fulfills all the criteria for a nation-state as defined in the 1933 Montevideo Convention: a defined territory, a permanent population, and a government which is capable of entering into diplomatic relations with other states. In fact, it has diplomatic ties with 24 UN member states.

We urge you to live up to the basic principles of human rights, democracy and self-determination which lay at the foundation of the establishment of the United Nations, reconsider your position, and facilitate the entry of Taiwan into the United Nations. The Taiwanese people have worked long and hard for their democracy, freedom and independence, and should gain a full and equal place among the international family of nations. Only then can peace be secured.

Sincerely,

C.T. Lee MD

President, Formosan Association for Public Affairs

Attachment no. 1

2758 (XXVI). Restoration of the lawful rights of the People's Republic of
China in the United Nations

The General Assembly,

Recalling the principles of the Charter of the United Nations

Considering the restoration of the lawful rights of the People's Republic of China is essential both for the protection of the Charter of the United Nations and for the cause that the United Nations must serve under the
Charter,

Recognizing that the representatives of the Government of the People's Republic of China are the only lawful representatives of China to the United Nations and that the People's Republic of China is one of the five permanent members of the Security Council,

Decides to restore all its rights to the People's Republic of China and to recognize the representatives of its Government as the only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations, and to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the United Nations and in all the organizations related to it.

1967th plenary meeting,
25 October 1971.

[Taiwan]

Taiwan in Int'l Sports: Anthem Sparks Expansionist Ire, Red Sox Expand into Asia

Taiwan is making waves in international sports. First, the neandertals in Beijing reprimanded the government of Japan because the ROC anthem was played at a sporting event there. The Japan Times has the call:

China has lodged a formal protest with Japan over the playing of the Taiwanese national anthem at a basketball tournament in the city of Tokushima, the official Xinhua News Agency reported Saturday.

A Japanese diplomat in Beijing was summoned to the Foreign Ministry on Friday and received a "stern representation" over the incident, Xinhua said.

"China expresses strong protest and demands the Japanese side to immediately take effective measures to remove this vile influence and avoid similar events from happening again," the report said.

Vile influence! Ya gotta love translators who translate what the Chinese speaker says, exactly. Speaking of expansionists, this Red Sox blogger reports on the Bosox expansion into East Asia:

The Red Sox have two extremely interesting players from Taiwan. They both have great promise, but are still far from the majors. Their names are Chih-Hsien Chiang and Che-Hsuan Lin. Expect to hear their names going forward as the Red Sox try to build a bigger influence in the East.

and on their prospects...

......For all the things that i don't like about him, he has been able to put up good numbers. Last year he had an OPS of .836 and this year at A ball he is hitting .737. The "Lebron of Taiwan" is a player that many are excited about. I would temper the excitement. The reality is far less than the reputation.

The man that i am more excited about is Che-Hsuan Lin. He is one year younger than Chiang and has far more athletic ability. He has great speed and a gun for an arm. Their are striking similarities to another Asian player, Ichiro. It was believed that if he had been in the draft he would have been a top 60 pick. He has already started Rookie ball, and has marginal success. For all of the down things, their are positive trends. He has been able to walk 13% of the time and shown an ability to steal bases.

Look for their faces on Everything in Taiwan in a few years, following the trail that Wang Chien-ming has blazed so successfully.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Japan]

Shih Ming-te indicted for Anti-Chen Faux Protests

Prosecutors have indicted former DPP Chairman and current pan-Blue ally Shih Ming-te for staging an unregistered protest during the faux protests against Chen Shui-bian last year:

Taipei prosecutors indicted former Democratic Progressive Party chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) and 15 others yesterday for violating the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) for unregistered protests during last year's Double Ten National Day.

Shih launched an anti-President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) campaign last August to urge Chen to resign.

On Double Ten National Day, Shih led thousands of red-clad protesters at a rally outside the Taipei Railway Station and claimed to have "besieged" the Presidential Office.

The indictment said the anti-Chen campaign organizers had not applied for a permit from the Taipei City Police Department to hold a parade or rally on Oct. 10 last year, as required by the Assembly and Parade Law.

Prosecutors said the police had put up warning signs and broadcasted requests to the organizers to get their followers to leave, but the protesters refused to move.

Among those indicted with Shih were Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Kuo Su-chun (郭素春), People First Party Legislator Shen Chih-hwei (沈智慧), former KMT legislator and Taipei City Department of Cultural Affairs Director Lee Yong-ping (李永萍), Taipei City Research & Development Evaluation Commission Emile Sheng (盛治仁) and New Party Taipei City Councilor Lee Hsin (李新).

Nine others were named in the indictment: Chien Hsi-chieh, Liu Kun-li (劉坤鱧), Chang Fu-chung (張富忠), Jerry Fan (范可欽), Wang Li-ping (王麗萍), Lo Shu-lei (羅淑蕾), former New Party legislator Cheng Lung-shui (鄭龍水), former Chinese Unity Promotion Party chairman Lin Cheng-chieh (林正杰), Chinese Culture University professor Yao Li-ming (姚立明) and lawyer John Wei (魏千峰).

If found guilty, the defendants could be sentenced to a maximum of two years imprisonment.

Maddog has already posted over at Taiwan Matters! on this, with a fantastic collection of links and such. He and I both think this is not a good idea:

1. As Maddog points out, there are much better laws that could be used to take down Shih. Millions of dollars of donations to the campaign remain AWOL, for example. He also notes that

I'm sure there are many other laws that could be more appropriately applied to this case. There was lots of violence involved (including violence against police who didn't assist with their illegal behavior [original version]), public airwaves were used to communicate directives to the mobs, tens of millions of dollars of cash were collected and remain out of sight, and more.

2. This act turns Shih the clown into Shih the martyr.

3. There are always unregistered protests in Taipei -- I was at one a couple of weeks ago right in front of the CKS MemorialContested Memorial in downtown Taipei. They are held by both sides. Unregistered protests, so long as they are peaceable, are things to be encouraged, not deplored.

4. It just invites tit-for-tat retaliation.

5. The law is a relic of the old KMT security state and needs to be revised or replaced. It should certainly not be used.

I hope that Shih and his faux protest buddies receive a slap on the wrist. This is really a bad idea.

Meanwhile, the people who really deserve some kind of punishment are the reporters who time after time refuse to provide international audiences with any of the context they need to understand the protests. AP via the Hindu:

Prosecutors say Shih and the others broke local laws governing assemblies and protests but didn't say how, Chang said. The maximum penalty they face wasn't immediately clear. Chang said a trial date hasn't been set.

The 66-year-old Shih, a veteran democracy activist who spent 25 years in prison during Taiwan's authoritarian rule under the previous Nationalist administration, said in an e-mail statement he wasn't surprised by the legal action because he has been jailed by authorities he challenged in the past.

``For someone who always opposes ruling power and devotes his life to the pursuit of democracy, I am not a bit surprised with the outcome,'' he said.

Shih defended the protests last year, saying they were always peaceful. No major violence broke out during the demonstrations, although protesters occasionally scuffled with police.

Local TV footage showed several dozen of Shih's supporters, again clad in red as they did during rallies last year, worshipping at a temple in Taipei, to kick off a new campaign against Chen.

As always, no mention that the protesters were partisans (see Bradsher's excellent article in the NYT; AP's reporter here noted that right away last year!), no mention that Shih switched to the anti-democracy side in 2001, no mention of the financial irregularities for which his duped followers have sued him, no mention of his crazed comments about his followers or the DPP, and no mention of the corrupt politicians who showed up in droves to speak to the protesters. The same crap may be found in the Reuters article on the topic. Instead, everything follows the narrative that Jason identified so long ago:

Sadly, this article is one of many cookie-cutter pieces designed to “fit” a narrative that editors seem to have already written: the “Mad Chen”, frustrated by his inability to plunge Taiwan into a war of independence with China, turns to corruption with the help of his Lady MacBeth while the rest of the country suffers in silence. Meanwhile, the selfless freedom fighter Shih returns from the political wilderness to valiantly fight on against his now-fallen student for the good of the Republic. Shit, if this story ends with Chen wearing a menacing black suit and helmet, I’m going to demand my money back.

With all the space wasted on nonsense, you'd think that just once, someone might report what is actually going on. In my Taiwan book on the media, the Shih case is going to be the leadoff case.

[Taiwan]

State Department Makes News Again

UPDATE: The government is saying that State hasn't done this and it is just the usual pro-Blue paper bullshit.

Minister of Foreign Affairs James Huang said Monday the United States has yet to respond to Taiwan's transit requests and reports of rejection by the media are purely speculation.

Huang made the assertion after swearing in new ambassadors and representatives to be based abroad. Chinese-language media have claimed that the U.S. will not allow President Chen Shui-bian to make transit stops on its mainland en route to Central America later this month, displeased at Chen's plan to call a referendum on whether the country should seek to join the Untied Nations under the designation of Taiwan.

Huang said it is too early for the media to draw the conclusion as the U.S. has not answered Chen's transit requests. The minister said he believed the U.S. will handle the matter in keeping with the protocol of comfort, convenience, safety and dignity.

Hopefully I am totally wrong and can put an apology on my blog for abusing the State Department when Chen lands in San Francisco or New York. Not to mention for believing UDN. I'm going home now to write "I will not believe UDN" one thousand times....meanwhile here's the old post, unchanged:

++++++++++

The State Department's ongoing campaign against Taiwan reached another nadir this month. First, newspapers in Taipei are reporting that State is only permitting Chen Shui-bian to land for 2-3 hours in Alaska or Hawaii when he visits Central America later this month:

The United States, angry at Taiwan's bid to join the United Nations, plans to restrict Taiwan President ChenShui-bian's transit through the US when he visits Central America later this month, a newspaper said on Thursday.

The United Daily News (UDN) said the US plans to ban Chen's jet from landing on the US mainland. Instead, it can only make a 2-3 hour refuelling stop in Alaska or Hawaii.

To avoid being humiliated by the US treatment, Taiwan is looking for alternative routes for Chen to go to Honduras for the August 23-25 summit with the leaders of Taiwan's Central American allies, UDN said.

It's been said before, but let's say it again. Taiwan cannot enter the UN because China has a veto there. Thus, nothing can happen. Once again, the State Department is getting all frazzled about nothing, just as it did when Chen rectified the names of certain companies, "froze" the NUC, and spoke at the FAPA banquet, or when pixels in the form of Chen Shui-bian appeared at the National Press Club -- none of which had any concrete effects. State has already signaled that it is angry over the UN entry issue -- there's no need for still more signaling. Time to grow up and let Chen land in the US somewhere -- especially since the House just passed a bill by unanimous voice vote that lifts restrictions on visits by high-level Taiwanese officials to the US.

Yet another reason to let Chen land is that State is already punishing Taiwan in more serious and concrete ways. Conservative China watcher and Taiwan friend John Tkacik of Heritage wrote in the latest issue of Defense News that State is blocking the sale of arms to Taiwan.

The budget, approved after the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) majority in the legislature agreed to release the funds, called for spending some US$1.3 billion on the aircraft and US$800 million on the missile batteries, plus a separate US$6 million to study the purchase of diesel electric submarines.

The official letter of request to buy the two systems has "been in the Pentagon for weeks," Tkacik wrote in the latest issue of the weekly military affairs publication.

The Pentagon has prepared a notification package that must be sent to Congress for its consideration before any sale is made, but it has been waiting for the necessary State Department green light to send the package, which the department has so far failed to give.

"State Department officers," Tkacik wrote, "now tell the Pentagon they don't want the package to move. They say they fear approving the package might `embolden' Taiwan's president to move ahead with a local referendum on Taiwan's entry into the United Nations."

Behind the State Department's opposition to the sales, Tkacik said, is the department's fear of the Chinese reaction, especially in view of Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill's need for Chinese cooperation on the North Korean nuclear issue.

"Internally, State Department officials acknowledge that the eagerness of Christopher Hill to get something concrete out of his North Korean denuclearization efforts means he will not entertain any policy decision that might anger Beijing. And Taiwan weapon sales are a sure ... way for the State Department to get an agitated visit from the Chinese ambassador," Tkacik wrote.

The State Department refused to comment on the issue or on Tkacik's report.

Way to keep the peace in the Taiwan Strait, guys. Deterrence of attack is based on Taiwan's access to advanced weaponry. If we don't sell them the aircraft, the odds of war rise, not fall.

The irony of State's position is clear. It accuses Chen Shui-bian of taking actions that will raise tensions in the Straits, even though they can have no concrete consequences, while at the same time, State itself takes actions that will have very concrete consequences for peace in the Straits.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Chen Shui-bian] [State Department]