Saturday, August 09, 2008

Ma Interview in WSJ

Peter Stein and the redoubtable Ting-yi Tsai interview President Ma in the Wall Street Journal (link behind pay wall.) Ma remains, as always, his slippery, China-loving self, though discussions I've been having with locals lately show that among swing voters Ma is facing uphill climbing. We told ya what Ma was! ....an excerpt:
On his flagging popularity at home:

WSJ: When you came to office, I think it's fair to say you came in with a good deal of political goodwill that seems to have evaporated somewhat quickly. the overall global economic conditions weren't in your favor, oil prices aren't under your control, but there have also been some criticisms that your administration hasn't handled some of the policies as well as people had hoped. How do you respond to that? Do you think there was just a learning curve that goes along with coming into an office like this?

Ma: This is a kind of growing pain, in the sense that we came in at a time when the world economy encountered its worst difficulties in 30 years. That actually hit not just Taiwan, but South Korea, Singapore, the United States, Europe.

We have to take right policies to make sure that when the economic situation turns better we will have a chance to catch that opportunity and develop ourselves. This is why we took advantage of this opportunity to liberalize, to deregulate and to set up policies that will make our economy stronger. If you look back to the last two and half months, you will see that we actually realized our campaign promise to have a clean government, to have a society of harmony, and to make peace across the Taiwan Strait. Now people do not have to worry about the specter of hostility across the Taiwan strait, and people don't have to argue over some very ideologically oriented subjects, for instance the name of the country, or the loyalty, or whether you love Taiwan or not. All these issues are not really concrete issues. They are pseudo-issues that only widen the division between and among different ethnic groups. Once the government stopped doing that, you see that the traditional harmonious society of Taiwan gradually emerged.

We didn't criticize the previous government on many things, but we actually inherited a government with lots of problems.

You talk about oil prices. The previous government froze oil prices for more than half a year. So by the time we took over, we had to do something about that, otherwise there would be obvious risk for the Chinese Petroleum Corp. or the Taiwan Power Co. They were facing severe difficulties, or approaching the level of bankruptcy, if no immediate measure was taken. So a government has to make difficult decisions.

I think Obama got a hero's welcome in Berlin, but he said in a very humble way: before you take office, you don't have to face many difficult decisions. [When you take office], you may offend somebody by implementing some of the not necessarily welcome policies, but you have to make that difficult decision. After all, you are the leader of the country. I think all heads of states, heads of governments, will have those kinds of experiences.

What we should do is not just look at the opinion polls, but rather you have to make sure the policies you are making are correct and right ones. For instance, in the cross-strait area, we are only catching up with the economic reality. All these policies have been considered, planned, formulated by the previous government, but they didn't do it.

On Taiwan's participation in international organizations:

WSJ: Can I ask you whether you have plans to press for Taiwan's membership in the U.N. when the U.N. holds its annual meeting in September? This has obviously been something Taiwan has pushed for in the past.

Ma: As you know there were two referendum proposals associated with the presidential election on March 22. One is proposed by the DPP [Democratic Progressive Party, the party of previous president Chen Shui-bian], the other by the KMT [Mr. Ma's Kuomintang, or Nationalist Party]. Both failed: they only got about 36% of the vote. This is quite interesting, because on the one hand, the general support for Taiwan's return to the U.N. can be as high as 60 or 70 [percent]. But once you come to a referendum, people seem to have different ideas.

Every since 1993, we have proposed to make our readmission to the U.N. an issue [but failed each time]. So we now will continue to consider this proposal but in a quite different setting. Not just for political reasons, but for legal reasons as well given the fact that both referendums failed. So we have to carefully review our policy options when we consider the September meeting of the U.N.

WSJ: So its not clear yet …

Ma: We are still considering this issue. On one hand, the people certainly have their aspirations for participating in a meaningful way in activities of the U.N. or its specialized agencies. But on the other hand, we have two referendums over there, so we have to carefully balance the two things before we make a final decision.

WSJ: What about other organizations such as the WHO [World Health Organization]?

Ma: We are thinking first of the Wealth Health Assembly, WHA. That is an activity and event of the WHO. We want to become an observer of that event. And this intention is supported by the U.S., Japan and EU. We hope next year we will be able to make it. This year the meeting of the WHA happened to fall on my inauguration. It actually started the day before my inauguration. The proposal was made by the previous administration. They wanted to become a member under the name Taiwan. Again, that failed, as expected. We will take a more flexible and more agile attitude on this issue as we proposed in our referendum. So hopefully next year the issue will be taken up again and given a new consideration when we change the way we apply for it.

WSJ: That includes possibly the name under which Taiwan participates?

Ma: We will try to keep the way we apply for it flexible and to let our supporters feel comfortable.

WSJ: For the APEC summit later this year, [because of China's objections] Taiwan's president is not allowed to attend. Are you yourself interested in attending that leaders' summit? Or might you be interested in sending someone such as former Vice President Lian Zhan?

Ma: Yes, we are thinking about a possible candidate (we) will send to APEC. But we haven't made a decision yet. It is going to be held in December. We still have enough time.

WSJ: Are you interested in attending yourself?

Ma: APEC meetings in the past normally will not permit a head of state from Taiwan to attend. So certainly that will be taken into account in our review of the situation.

WSJ: Will you try to convince China to allow, or at least not to oppose your attempt?

Ma: Mainland China isn't the only member of APEC. Their consideration is important, but it's not the only consideration. We have to consult with other members of APEC to see what would be the most appropriate candidate for APEC.

On U.S.-Taiwan relations:

WSJ: In July, Adm. Timothy Keating [the commander of the U.S. Pacific Command] came out and basically said that in fact the Bush administration has frozen any arms sales to Taiwan for the time being. At same time Taiwan has set aside money in the budget, or there's been an expectation Taiwan should set aside money in the budget for military procurement. Have you sought any explanation from the White House? Are you trying to get the Bush administration to reverse this decision? Or do you expect that this is just a temporary measure and that this will be unfrozen after the Olympics?

Ma: We have been assured that Adm. Keating's remarks would not affect the position of the U.S. on military sales to Taiwan, and we have even been told his remarks were misquoted, or he has misspoken. And all the responsible officials from U.S. have assured us that nothing has been changed. But our request for the seven items of military hardware are going through the interagency review, so they will not just let us know, they will let Congress know in due time. So we are waiting for that move. As you know, all the budget that support these seven items was passed last year. And we have already told the U.S. many, many times that this is our policy. So we were quite surprised and puzzled by rumors in the last couple of months that we asked the U.S. to delay the decision. That's contradictory to our wishes.

When we improve relations with the mainland, we still need a viable armed forces in order to defend Taiwan. And I made it very clear in my inauguration speech we will demonstrate a very strong will to defend ourselves. In future if we negotiate a peace agreement with mainland, we certainly want to negotiate from a position of strength, not weakness.

We have no intention to engage the mainland in an arms race. That would not be in the interest of our people. But on the other hand, Taiwan has to defend itself and this is something that is generally accepted by the majority of people here.

WSJ: Do you worry that despite assurances to the contrary, this is something the Bush administration might want to push onto the next administration and that that administration, starting from a clean slate, will not want to deal with something so sensitive?

Ma: No, I will not worry about that.

WSJ: You have previously spoken out about your desire to have China remove missiles that are directed at Taiwan from the other side of the Strait. Is that something you've raised with the Chinese recently? Do you see any movement on that front?

Ma: That issue is related our negotiation with the mainland on the peace agreement. It is not related to future negotiations, for instance, on direct flights. I think I made it very clear we don't want to negotiate a peace agreement under threat of missile attack. So those two things are related. But removal of the missiles is not related to talks on either the economic relationship or international space.

WSJ: Do you have an idea when those negotiations on a peace agreement might be able to move forward? Or is it at this point up to China to make the next move?

Ma: We don't think that is the first priority. I think the first priority is normalization of economic relations, because that will have direct bearing on daily life of our people. And of equal importance is the issue of international space. You have talked about diplomatic truce, or reconciliation. Those are very closely related to the sense of dignity on the part of the Taiwanese people. So that also has priority.

WSJ: Can you speak a little bit about how you see the relationship between Taiwan and U.S. developing over time? If and when, for instance, Taiwan and China are able to negotiate a peace accord, what do you think the relationship with the U.S. will evolve into?

Ma: As we improve our relations with the mainland, the U.S. is very pleased with what happened, as you can tell from remarks from President Bush on July 30 in his White House interview. He said relations between Taiwan and mainland China is in a better place.

This is not just the view of the U.S. government but is also a shared view of many knowledgeable experts on this issue.

I think they are all cautiously optimistic about the emergence of a stable structure in this part of world which will benefit U.S. very much.

On the other hand, I'm sure we will continue the current security relationship with the U.S. by not only continuing our arms procurement from the U.S., but keeping our military defense budget at a level no less than 3% of the GDP. I'm sure all these will receive a positive response from the U.S.

WSJ: A few years ago there was a lot discussion about a new security framework involving U.S. and Japan and Taiwan. Has that situation changed at all? Are discussions of that nature still taking place?

Ma: I don't see any basic change of the situation. We continue to support the U.S.-Japan security arrangement, although we are not part of it. As you can see, in the last two years, in spite of this security arrangement, Japan and mainland China have improved relations. In the last two years, there are frequent visits by high-level officials – premiers, presidents. Even the exchange of visits of their warships. This is unprecedented in 60 years.

The U.S. has been proud of creating a situation where it could deal with Japan and mainland China simultaneously in a peaceful way. That was not possible in the last century, when the U.S. had to choose sides. They have to align with one and fight the other. Now in the case of Taiwan and mainland China, the U.S. also finds itself in a situation that it could deal with the two sides without having the two sides fighting each other. This is something the U.S. has always wanted.

WSJ: But would Taiwan be interested in becoming part of U.S.-Japan security arrangement?

Ma: No, that's not possible. Why? Because we don't have diplomatic relations with the U.S. It has to be done in a more informal way.

WSJ: We are drawing near to the presidential election in the U.S. These have been perhaps the most closely followed campaigns in recent memory, not just domestically but around the world. What do you think the selection of the next president might mean for Taiwan?

Ma: As you know, the U.S. policy toward mainland China and Taiwan was formulated in late 1970s, and throughout the seven presidents ever since then, the policy remained the same. It is actually composed of the three joint communiqués between the U.S. and mainland China, and of course the Taiwan relations act. I don't see the possibility of changing that by either Obama or McCain. And this policy has bipartisan support from the U.S.

No matter who is going to win, I believe the situation will largely remain the same. That is to say, our current approach in cross-strait relations will continue to be supported by the future administration of U.S.

Actually, when I was elected on March 22, I received congratulatory messages from both Obama and McCain. They also expressed the kind of sentiment that I just mentioned. I think they were all impressed by Taiwan's maturing democracy and hope to continue the fruitful relations between the two sides.

Ma knows how to handle western media audiences. Commendably, Stein and Tsai don't leave the readers with a set of fawning comments about Ma's charm or his ability to speak English. Note that Ma always refers to China as "mainland China."

American Airlines thinks Anschluss already happened

What a day yesterday! The Olympics opening ceremony, Russia goes to war with Georgia -- while there are US advisors in Georgia, and that nation is angling to become a NATO member, and Dem candidate John Edwards announces that he put the whole Dem party at risk so he could boink someone he wasn't married to and then lie about it during the primary process.

Big fun over here in Taiwan this week. Last week longtime Taiwan scholar June Tuefel Dreyer discovered that American Airlines thinks that Taiwan is part of China.

這位美國航空公司人員很有把握地說,台灣已經自己要求把名字改為中華台北(Chinese Taipei),「因此就意味著台灣是中國的一部分,簽證當然是必備的。」她聽聞大為震驚,再質問航空公司人員這項要求是否來自中國當局?得到的答覆更是斬釘截鐵:不是,台灣名稱改變的要求是來自台灣政府。

(..."now that it is part of China, a visa must be needed." I said Taiwan wasn’t part of China, it was a sovereign state. She replied no, that a while back---she wasn’t sure exactly when ---TW had announced that it was changing its name from Taiwan to Chinese Taipei.....she was reading to me from a set of directions she’d been supplied with.)
Dr. Dreyer was attempting to get a ticket to come here, when American Airlines informed her she'd need a visa since we're part of China. Others have reported similar experiences. News about this in Chinese from Maddog:

http://news.sina.com.tw/article/20080808/673486.html
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/aug/7/today-fo5.htm
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/aug/6/today-o1.htm

Thursday, August 07, 2008

Daily Links, Aug 7, 2008

A friend sent me this pic from the days of WWII, depicting the Five Allies: France, China, USSR, USA, and the UK.

I lost another slew of comments, some already posted. My apologies. Meanwhile, who is gathering on the blogs today?

  • Wild at Heart has two comments on recent news items from longtime activist and lawyer Robin Winkler.

  • Pinyin News compares the much-despised Tongyong Pinyin and Hanyu Pinyin in Taiwan.

  • A-gu on declassifying Chen's state affairs documents.

  • Laowiseass says its an Island in a box.

  • Carrie Marshall's tale of her harrowing brush with deafness.

  • Mad Minerva blogs on Taiwan the canary, Beijing, and the KMT.

  • Jerome on the Taitung County Magistrate: she did it all for love. Great tale of corruption on the Beautiful Isle. After the mess last year in which she and her husband gamed the system with the support of Ma Ying-jeou, the KMT suspended her. Bit late for that, eh?

  • Taoyuan Nights notes inflation is now at 14 year high. Ma save us! Taoyuan Nights always has great economic coverage.

  • Todd and Cathy's wedding photos. Partaking of a great Taiwan tradition....NOTE: Cute warning: not for the faint of heart.

  • Stocks and Politics has the July DPP newsletter in English.

  • The Real Taiwan has a scooter accident. Hasn't everyone?

  • Patrick Cowsill has great photos and some history of Bali, Taiwan.

  • Steve Crook on the historical site, the Shanshang Watercourse.

  • France moves to close the Lafayette case. Without a trial. (more).

  • ViolenceNepal looks at a Taiwan-China-US conflict.
  • EVENTS: Protest at Chinese embassy in Washington DC today on China's human rights record. Starts at 2, runs til 5.

    MEDIA
    : A local paper company is making paper from rocks. This is going to ruin the game "rock, scissors, paper".... WSJ reports that taxis in Beijing are bugged. In fact major media organs have carried a number of security warnings, saying that if your laptop is taken at the border it will be bugged, and to watch yourself with passwords, etc, in hotels and especially in internet cafes. Luckily China is a trustworthy partner, eager to integrate itself into the US-dominated international system.... Max Hirsch has a great article on how Japan breeds guide dogs for Taiwan. Taiwan Journal of Sociology of Education, latest issues. Taiwan: the undiscovered eco-tourism island. Taiwan hopes to attract Muslim tourists. Probably have to do something about the pork fat in everything.... Despite its failing Pacific diplomacy, Taiwan intends to accelerate its FTA with the Dominican Republic. Wang Li-hom says an Indian film stole his music. Workers strike at Taiwan plants in Vietnam due to 27% inflation rate. Let's make the sacrifice, and send them Ma Ying-jeou right away... Great interview with former representative to the US Joseph Wu. Not comedy: Bush set to prod China on human rights. It is amazing what King George can do with a straight face. The Jamestown China Brief has a short piece on Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng's remarks about the legislature overseeing cross-strait negotiations. Sure, Wang, we believe it. Bruce Gilley argues in WSJ that Sun Yat-sen's plans foreign investment Christianity Communist principles internal reforms the Internet the KMT Hong Kong Taiwan the Olympics are going to make China more democratic...

    GAG ME WITH A SPOON: Saw this in the GoogleAds today: out there investment websites are still pushing Taiwan with crap (same old articles!) that two minutes of research could dispel:

    This has been a popular opinion for a while, but the election of Ma Ying-jeou makes Taiwan an even safer pick for investors.

    Its GDP increased 5.5% in 2007 and is expected to grow around 7% in 2008. Meanwhile, Taiwan's inflation is a very safe 1.8%.

    Ironically, recent news reports said that Taiwan's projected 2008 growth has been downgraded to around 4.3% by the major economic analysis institutes. Of course, the inflation figure given is laughable, whatever the government may say. Tom Plate has another awful piece at AsiaMedia that appears to have been ghostwritten in Beijing:

    But for the moment at least, the greatest destabilizing forces over the Taiwan Strait are churning not from within but are coming from the outside -- from those who might profit from a cross-strait conflict. Within the larger, cross-strait Chinese family, there is suddenly a little morning calm, as it were. One has the sense that in the course of time the Chinese family will sort this matter out for good, as they have been tackling such tough questions for thousands of years. For the time being at least, try to forget about all that blather regarding the "Clash of Civilizations." The big story now appears to be the growing compromise within complex and mammoth Chinese civilization itself.
    You don't have to read the whole thing, studded with errors and misreadings, It's enough when you see the reference to "cross-strait Chinese family", one of those terms, like lebensraum or manifest destiny, that when uttered, signals the intelligent hearer that an entire people is getting the shaft.

    Diplomacy Lunacy

    Ma Ying-jeou continues to reduce the island's visibility. First, as many of you are aware, his upcoming trip with a transit through the US will be done as quietly as possible. No meeting cheering crowds of Taiwanese, no visits to ballgames with prominent congress critters like Chen Shui-bian did. In fact, the Ma team apparently instructed the press not to report on the transit through the US, but later clarified and said that they meant there wouldn't be anything to report.

    One of the Chen Administration's diplomatic successes was maintaining its relations with smaller Pacific Islands. But as the Taipei Times reports, Ma is downgrading those as well:

    Ma announced last night during a state banquet held for Nauruan President Marcus Stephen that the third Taiwan-South Pacific Allies leaders’ summit will be canceled.

    Citing “time constraints,” Ma said the event, scheduled to take place in Kaohsiung this year, will be held in the Solomon Islands next year.

    The summit, established by former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), was first held in Palau in 2006.

    When Ma came in he announced that the "dollar diplomacy" game in the South Pacific was over, and it looks like he is sticking to that. That same article announced Taiwan's new "flexibility" on the WHO and WHA application:

    Hong Kong’s Wen Wei Po newspaper reported that China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Chairman Wang Yi (王毅) had said that although China would continue to block Taiwan’s applications to the WHO, it would look into setting up an international network that would be a “new framework” independent of the WHO to include Taiwan in information on disease outbreaks.

    Many commentators and pundits argued that China should/would give Taiwan more international space in return for a "conciliatory" attitude from Taiwan. Wrong again, guys. Nor does the public care: while everyone I talk to expresses dissatisfaction with the KMT's domestic policies, few spontaneously raise the issue of Taiwan's foreign relations. Taiwan News commented cogently on Ma's striking lack of diplomatic derring-do (emphasis mine):

    During a dinner with former foreign ministers Sunday evening at the Taipei Guest House and a seminar with senior diplomatic officials held at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Monday, Ma discussed at length his concept of "viable diplomacy" or, more precisely, a "modus vivendi" diplomacy, a term which is a Latin phrase for a "a mode of living " arranged between arrangement between two parties to coexist despite deep differences.

    For Ma, the phrase clearly refers to his government's strategy of improving relations with the authoritarian People's Republic of China and building his government's external relations on the platform of "diplomatic truce" and "reconciliation" with the Chinese Communist Party regime.

    Under this roof, Ma elaborated "overall goals" such as the preservation of existing diplomatic partnerships, the rebuilding of "trust" with the United States, Japan and other informal partners by promising not to be a "trouble-maker" and cultivating "surprise free" ties, refraining from "foreign assistance" diplomacy and avoiding "cutthroat competition" with the PRC over diplomatic allies.

    In fact, none of these priorities are proper "goals" but only tactics or methods to achieve diplomatic goals. Indeed, the tone of Ma's "goals" points not to any autonomous notion of diplomacy to uphold the interests of Taiwan's 23 million people but the adoption of a mentality of habitual self-censorship and self-abnegation.

    Moreover, Ma's exposition offered no analysis whatsoever of the goals and priorities of the other actors affecting Taiwan's diplomacy, such as the United States, Japan, our 23 official diplomatic allies and, incredibly, the PRC itself.

    Even though Ma's notion of "a mode of living" diplomacy implicitly elevates the cross-strait relationship over all other external ties, Ma failed to take account of the PRC's open adoption of a diplomatic strategy aimed at isolating Taiwan internationally and even pressing for Taiwan's annexation, as mandated by Beijing's March 2005 "Anti-Secession Law."

    Moreover, even though Ma stated that "diplomatic truce and reconciliation" means that "we do not need to engage in meaningless cutthroat fighting overseas" over diplomatic allies, senior PRC diplomats from Foreign Minister Yang Jie-chi down declare that Beijing will never abandon its "one China principle" which claims Taiwan as part of the PRC and are persisting without any signs of relent or "taking a breath" numerous "cutthroat struggles" to denigrate or even eliminate Taiwan's participation in governmental and non-governmental international organizations.

    Moreover, information from U.S. "track two" exercises indicate that the PRC diplomatic establishment rejects the possibility of substantive oncessions that would, for example, allow Taiwan a truly autonomous, dignified and meaningful method of participation in major sovereignty-based international organizations, such as the World Health Organization.

    Bluntly put, China's expansion, in the 'death by a thousand cuts' mode, continues apace. As this Asia Times article points out, Taiwan is not the only victim:

    And yet, history and national identity are notorious for trumping raw economic interests in Asia. Consider the most fundamental of inter-state relations: a shared border. China and India's has been under dispute for nearly a century, and China has been testing New Delhi this year with a wave of abrupt but underreported incursions into Indian territory. Beijing still claims tens of thousands of square miles of Indian territory in the Indian states of Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh, the subject of a 1962 border war.

    China's incursions, in some ways routine by now, have become more numerous (anywhere between 60 and several hundred) and brazen (one crossing having driven a kilometer into Indian territory) in the past six months - an unusual provocation, given China's sensitivity to world opinion ahead of the August Summer Olympic Games in Beijing.

    Were the border incursions an isolated incident, they would likely be swallowed by the mounting ties that bind China and India. But isolated they are not, and in 2006 a warning by China's ambassador to India put in question the warmth generated by a dozen of rehearsed summits: "[T]he whole of the state of Arunachal Pradesh is Chinese territory ... we are claiming all of that. That is our position." The point was not lost on the 1.1 million Indians living in a state the size of Maine. Indian diplomats from the state have even been denied visas by Beijing, which reminds them documentation is not required to travel their own country.

    The reason China cannot be permitted to have Taiwan is right there: because it will only encourage them to discover that more of their neighbors' lands are the sacred territory of China, Chinese for every minute of the last 5,000 years.....

    Tuesday, August 05, 2008

    Some quickies for Tuesday -- UPDATED --

    Ma Save Us! -- The CNA reports that tourists from China are averaging a mind-numbing 174 a day.
    The total number of mainland Chinese tourists to Taiwan reached 5,389 over the past month since the government opened up the visits of Chinese tourists to the island on July 4, due mainly to the stringent stance of the Chinese authorities in screening applications by Chinese people for such visits, especially on the eve of the Olympics Games.

    The number, averaging 174 daily, is a far cry from local tourism industry`s original expectations and constitutes only a small portion of the government`s maximum daily quota of 3,000 for Chinese tourists.

    Industry insiders predict that the situation will not be improved substantially until the advent of travel peak season in October when there will be long holidays in China.

    An official of the Tourism Bureau, under the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, ascribed the disappointing outcome to the complicated procedures of the Chinese authorities in screening the applications by Chinese people to visit Taiwan, a problem aggravated by the stringent policy of Chinese authorities towards such applications on the eve of the Olympic Games. Such applications, for instance, must be presented three weeks in advance. In addition, up to now the Chinese authorities only allow 33 travel agencies in 13 provinces to undertake touring business for Taiwan.

    Moreover, the Chinese government forbids local officials and executives of state enterprises to leave their posts before the Olympic Games, virtually eliminating the business for visiting professional groups, which used to account for half of Chinese visitors to the island.
    Hopefully things will pick up after the Olympics. Meanwhile the housing market seems to be on its way to an implosion adjustment, as Taoyuan Nights posts some terrifying interesting data on what to expect when the sky falls in in the housing market in the future.

    Broadcasted: why does local cable suck? Thomas Crampton has the answer:

    Why do Taiwan cable companies invest so little in digital TV?
    No incentive. The national government restricts Taiwan cable operators to subscription fees of roughly NT$500 (US$18) per month. Local officials further influence pricing, with the Taipei mayor recently making lower cable fees part of his election platform.

    Faced with dismal returns, Taiwan’s cable companies invested an annual average of US$68 per household, compared with US$230 in Hong Kong, US$281 in Singapore and US$605 in the United States, according to CASBAA.

    The whole post is fascinating. Maybe there's a pile of money to made in that market.

    Nazi.org has the KMT on the sidebar (scroll down, look left). Dunno what it means. Highway 11 mag is out for August.

    Way cool: Check out a bit of history with this long article on U2 recon aircraft flown by ROC pilots.

    UPDATE: Reeb has some scary comments in post below this one:
    tw, a major event just happened in the USA regarding Chinese economic blackmail. The recent US$800B+ forced buyout (nationalization) of the GSE's Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was done expediently by Paulson last week because he was economically threaten by the PRC. I've been contemplating this for about a week, but now others have posted about it:

    Now we know there was a threat

    Fannie's Mudd Soothed Asian Investors as Bonds Rose

    US Blackmailed By China?

    This is definitely [**NOT**] a good sign for Free Taiwan.

    Taiwan Post Gone Again

    Get'em while they're hot! They may well be the last stamps with "Taiwan" on them for a while, as the KMT has re-asserted its colonial identity over Taiwan:

    The name of the state-run postal company was changed back to the original title Chunghwa Post, in a low-key ceremony in Taipei.

    Former Directorate General of Posts director Hsu Chieh-kuei (許介圭) criticized former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) administration yesterday for its name-change policy, calling it nothing more than political maneuvering.

    Last year President Chen changed the name of Chunghwa Post back to "Taiwan Post," the name it had been known under during the Japanese and early KMT colonial periods. This was part of a process of restoring the name "Taiwan" to organizations that had once had that name, and removing markers of KMT colonialism from names across the island. During transitions from colonial and authoritarian governments to local, democratic governance, such name changes are common.

    The original political maneuvering was deleting "Taiwan" from such names in the first place, part of a political strategy to eliminate the idea of "Taiwan" from political discourse. The Postal Museum's online presentation (click on the pic) is an outpost of this colonialist historical pattern:

    China's modern postal service was founded in 1896 and the General Post Office was set in Beijing. For a hundred years, the efforts made by each generation of postal workers have contributed to the growth of the postal enterprise. Especially, the contributions which all former General postmasters devoted cannot be left unrecognized.

    People talk about Taiwan's contested identities, but the real problem is not that it is contested, but that, in so many public spaces, it is not contested at all.

    Monday, August 04, 2008

    Shocked by Chinese Taipei

    A squirrel on the NCKU campus.

    Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!
    Croupier: Your winnings, sir.

    Just last week the President and his KMT cronies were hailing the use of Zhonghua Taipei (Chinese Taipei) to designate Taiwan in the State media in China for the Olympics as a major diplomatic victory. And then today the Taipei Times announced that CCTV had used Zhongguo Taipei (China Taipei).

    The Presidential Office yesterday expressed “shock” over China’s description of taekwondo Olympic gold medalist Chu Mu-yen (朱木炎) as being from Zhongguo Taibei, but stopped short of criticizing Beijing.

    .....

    On Friday, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said official Chinese media had stopped referring to Taiwan as Zhongguo Taibei (中國台北, Taipei, China), using instead Zhonghua Taibei (中華台北, Chinese Taipei), calling the development a diplomatic victory.

    Wang yesterday declined to speculate on whether Beijing would repeat the “technical error” while Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) is attending the Games.

    Now, I know dear readers, that you are nodding to yourselves: "See? We knew those Chinese would renege on the deal faster than you can say USS Kitty Hawk." Alas, I fear they are keeping the deal...just not the deal that had been openly arranged between Beijing and the government of President Jellyspine Ma....

    ...for you see, had this been a DPP government, we wouldn't be fighting over Zhongguo or Zhonghua. We'd be drawing the line at Taiwan. So guess what? The CCP and the KMT have neatly arranged it so that everyone in Taiwan is now committed to Chinese Taipei!

    That didn't take long, did it?

    The term Taiwan has vanished from the lexicon of the sovereignty debate and will from now on be used solely to placate the domestic masses. No doubt it will be resurrected briefly for six weeks in 2012. In the meantime, we've become something like part of China. Not quite there, but this death by a thousand cuts diplomacy is really quite slick. Too bad the KMT can't manage the domestic economy as well as it can handle dismantling all that the DPP fought for over the last eight years.

    The second use of this Name Game controversy was obscuring another one: notice that there was almost no local debate over the order in which Taiwan would march in the opening ceremonies. This is classic KMT strategy -- invent/use one controversy to obscure a DPP success or a KMT failure. Taiwan is now marching in the Cs, right after the Central African Republic and right before -- you guessed it -- China Hong Kong and China Macao. Feiren observed to me the other day: remember the Olympic Torch debate that had the Torch coming into Taiwan from a place that wasn't China? The order of Taiwan in the ceremony replicates the Torch path. Only thanks to the noisy controversy about noises, nobody really protested (except for one of Taiwan's Olympic athletes the other day. Someone gets it....and the DPP, of course).

    Speaking of the Beijing Olympics, many observers have pointed out how China's use of the Torch to signal the vassalage of the states it passed through replicates Nazi Germany's invention and use of the Torch. But another Nazi-Beijing connection came out today with the story of how Albert Speer Jr, the son of the Nazi production czar, designed the Beijing Olympic venue with his father's plans in mind. Further commentary will now cease, since we have violated Godwin's law most severely....

    Cargo Links, Cargo Cults, and Taiwan's Ports

    For years shippers have argued that direct cargo links to China would enable Taiwan's ports to regain their high rankings and return to competitiveness. Since links with China have long been treated, cargo-cultlike, as a panacea for all that ails Taiwan economically, it is only appropriate that the China Cargo Cult arrive, well, at cargo. A couple of articles from Lloydslist forwarded to me by a Loyal Reader comment on the possibility of direct cargo links. First, the Dream of Chinese link takes flight....

    IT IS a year of expectations for the shipping community in Taiwan. Since Ma Ying-jeou of the Kuomintang party became president in May, a dream shared by many Taiwanese merchants has become possible.

    The physical connection between mainland China and Taiwan — air and sea transport suspended since 1949 — is likely to be restored soon.

    Direct cargo between Taiwan and China has to stop at a third party port, usually Japan's Ishigaki, sometimes Busan or Hong Kong, before sailing to the other side of the Taiwan Strait.

    The Kaohsiung Offshore Shipping Centre is the only terminal in Taiwan that is licensed to receive transhipment cargoes directly from the two designated Chinese ports, Xiamen and Fuzhou.

    According to the pledge that Mr Ma made during his election campaign, direct transport links between mainland China and Taiwan would be launched within a year of him taking office if he could reach agreement with Chinese authorities.
    .....

    The next item on the action list is widely expected to be the restoration of a direct sea link for cargo across the Taiwan Strait, as hinted at by Chiang Pin-kung, chairman of Straits Exchange Foundation, a semi-official organisation set up by the Taiwanese authorities to handle technical and business matters with mainland China.

    But alas, even when the gods deliver cargo, there may not be enough....

    Meanwhile, container ports on the island have major concerns. Taipei Port Container Terminal, the joint venture between Evergreen Marine, Yang Ming Marine Transport and Wan Hai Lines, will open in January next year.

    The new port is expected to compete directly with Kaohsiung and Keelung for cargo from north Taiwan.

    Before dealing with the threat from Taipei port, Kaohsiung port in southwest Taiwan may want to first fend off competition from Xiamena and Fuzhou as its throughput growth slowed in the first half.

    Kaohsiung port is also busy adding more capacity to its terminal as the utilisation rate of its berths exceeded 100% last year.

    In the north, Keelung port has prepared an alternative plan to switch its business focus from cargo vessels to cruiseships in case volumes go down.

    A ship under construction at the Taiwan Shipbuilding yard in Hsiaokang outside of Kaohsiung.

    What has happened is that the government has been engaged in port expansion, meaning that the new ports are not so much developing new business as cannibalizing business from existing ports. Keelung, mentioned above, has long been bracing for this news. The second article below discusses some of the problems....(emphasis mine)

    WHILE some believe the restoration of direct links for cargo across the strait seems to be a solve-it-all remedy for the marine transport and logistics industry, Robert Ho, president and chief operating officer of Yang Ming Marine Transport, says it is not the opening-up that matters, but the degree to which things open up.

    The relaxation of non-transhipment cargo transport, which is the most likely deal to be struck by the end of this year, will offer little help.

    The second largest container shipping carrier in Taiwan does not even plan to deploy a vessel on the trade should non-transhipment cargo be allowed to be shipped directly across the strait instead of via a third port.

    Yang Ming currently charters slots from other lines on the trade.

    "The route is not profitable," says Mr Ho. The more aggressive mainland Chinese shipping lines, which outnumber Taiwanese firms on the trade, have made the relatively small market very competitive.

    The same thing has been noted on the direct flights. Once higher fuel costs and direct competition from Chinese airlines are are factored in, the fat profits vanish. People seem to have forgotten that once direct links are open cut-rate Chinese carriers will be able to ship cargoes. Can Taiwan firms compete?

    However, Mr Ho admits that such direct links would be lower and transit time shorter as vessels do not need to visit Japan's Ishigaki to obtain a stamp before berthing on either side of the strait. The cost reduction would reflect on freight rates in the long run.

    Good news for carriers, according to Mr Ho, would be the opening-up of the direct sea trade that allowed both transhipment and direct cargo to be carried by the same ship between any Chinese and Taiwanese ports.

    Currently, ships that carry direct cargo to and from China and Taiwan cannot at the same time transport transhipment cargo. Also, just two ports in China's Fujian province are allowed to load transshipment cargo destined for Kaohsiung.

    Note again the China issue....

    Meanwhile, the volume of transhipment cargo coming from China is shrinking at Kaohsiung port as ports on the other side of the sea grow rapidly in scale and in the number of services they offer, according to Mr Ho. Yang Ming also ended a service between Xiamen and Kaohsiung last year.

    However, it seems impossible for mainland China to let go a policy that helps nurture its own ports at a time where transhipment cargo has become the most coveted business for ports in the region.

    Recall that those hordes of Chinese tourists can only fly to Taiwan on Chinese carriers. What makes anyone think the cargo business is going to be run on different principles? Especially since Ma has nothing to negotiate with, and yet must get a deal. That spells S-E-L-L-O-U-T.

    Keelung Port seen from the ridges overlooking the city.

    The next piece discusses Keelung and the costs of shipping....

    ALMOST certain to miss its volume targets in 2008, Keelung port is expecting another rough year ahead.

    The port forecasts a throughput of 1.96m teu for 2009, 13% lower than this year's target of 2.26m teu, already regarded as unattainable when the port released its first-half figures.

    A dampened transpacific trade inthe past two months has crushed hopesof the second largest boxport on the island breaking its throughput record twicein a row, Keelung Harbor Bureau director-general Hsiao Ding-Hsun told Lloyd'sList.

    The port handled 1.07m teu in the first six months of this year, 6,400 teu fewer than in the same period last year.

    Meanwhile, Keelung's business is moving elsewhere:

    Just 38 nautical miles away with a deeper draught of 16 m, Taipei Port Container Terminal, a joint venture between Evergreen, Wan Hai Lines and Yang Ming Marine, is due to open in January 2009. In a study last year, the Taiwan Ministry of Transportation and Communications estimated that the new facility will take 452,000 teu away from Keelung port.

    As yet another article today notes, Taipei port is also impacting Kaohsiung:

    THE list of container terminals in north Asia that are targeting transhipment cargo includes Shanghai, Busan, Ningbo, Qingdao and Xiamen. If the sector is not crowded enough, mind you, Taipei port will join soon.

    This implies that Kaohsiung port, with 51% of its throughput being transhipment goods, faces a scenario in which half its volume is coveted by its eager neighbours.

    The utilisation rate of the eighth busiest boxport in the world and Taiwan's top port reached 100% last year. With a designed capacity of 10m teu a year, the port handled 10.26m teu in 2007.

    Kaohsiung's priority should be adding new capacity before its clients conveniently go to its neighbours for empty berths. The port apparently has got the point, but new facilities are about two years from being ready.

    Yang Ming Marine Transport, the second largest carrier in Taiwan, has won a 50-year concession to develop four berths on 75 ha of land in the sixth container centre of Kaohsiung port. The additional 1.5 km of quay will add 2m teu of handling capacity to the port.

    Construction of the first two berths, which started last December, is scheduled to be completed by 2010, while the remaining two will be available in 2013.

    c031.jpg
    The new Taipei Port under construction.

    Finally, the changes in the island's logistics markets caused by Taipei Port are discussed in some depth. The port, at the entrance to the Tamshui River northwest of Taipei, is affecting the entire island:

    THE opening of Taipei Port Container Terminal, backed by Evergreen Marine, Wan Hai Lines and Yang Ming Marine Transport, on January 1 next year will change the logistics landscape in Taiwan.

    The new port will help shippers save more than NT$10bn ($327m) of inland transport costs a year. Around 40% of imported and exported cargoes in Taiwan come from, or are destined to, the northern and central parts of the island. But not all of them can be shipped or unloaded at Keelung Port, whose relatively shallow draught of 12 m-14.5 m cannot accommodate containerships over 5,500 teu.

    More than 1m teu of containerised cargoes are thus being trucked between Kaohsiung and northern and central Taiwan, said president of TPCT Chen Hau-Gi. He added that it costs NT$7,000-NT$8,000 per teu to carry those boxes between northern Taiwan and Kaohsiung.

    Moreover, the new facilities will have little difficulty in attracting carriers and cargoes with the backing of the three lines.

    Largest shareholder Evergreen Marine, with a 50% stake in the port, has no dedicated terminal at nearby Keelung port and plans to have 12 services calling at the Taipei terminal in its start-up stage, according to Mr Chen. Asia-Europe and transpacific services will make up the majority of the services with the rest being intra-Asia.

    Wan Hai Lines and Yang Ming Marine Transport have dedicated terminals in Keelung port. Wan Hai holds 40% of the shares in the joint venture, with the remaining 10% belonging to Yang Ming. Wan Hai is planning to have two near-ocean services calling Taipei at the beginning, said Mr Chen.

    Taiwanese officials often complain that Kaohsiung's place in the world port rankings is falling. It is hard to imagine how it could be otherwise, with new growth in Shanghai, Busan, and elsewhere. Now the port in Taipei, well-placed to serve Taiwan's rapidly growing northern region, is another regional competitor. Expect Kaohsiung's place to continue to fall.

    Sunday, August 03, 2008

    Two From FAPA

    Found a couple of interesting things from FAPA in my mailbox today. First, FAPA passed along its commentary on the recent letter from 14 Senators expressing their displeasure with the way China abuses Taiwan in the WHO.

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

    For Immediate Release August 2, 2008

    CONTACT: Iris Ho (202)280-0166; irisho@fapa.org

    SENATORS CRITICIZE SECRET CHINA-WHO M.O.U. AND BUSH ADMINISTRATION's LACK OF INITIATIVES IN BRINGING TAIWAN INTO THE WHO In a letter to President Bush dated August 1, 2008, five Senators led by Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) express disappointment about the World Health Assembly's (WHA) decision last May to again exclude Taiwan from participating in the annual weeklong meegmail.com, hju.ting in Geneva and urge President Bush to seek inclusion of the 23 million people in the World Health Organization (WHO).

    For the past twenty years, Senator Sherrod Brown has been a leading voice in both Houses of Congress for the inclusion of the 23 million people of Taiwan in the World Health Organization.

    The Senators write: "We regret that the Administration was not able to find ways to make Taiwan's voice heard in the World Health Organization (WHO). Taiwan's participation is vital if we are to effectively combat global health threats. We urge you to support and advocate for Taiwan's membership in the WHO."

    They continue: "Very little progress has been made since Public Law No. 107-10 mandated the Secretary of State endorse "meaningful participation" for Taiwan in the WHA. We are concerned that the recent report by the State Department to Congress regarding Taiwan's participation in the WHO did not mention any administration initiatives in this regard."

    In a thinly disguised jab at the secret Memorandum of Understanding that China concluded with the WHO in 2005 allowing China to determine which information from the WHO reaches Taiwan, if any, the Senators add: "In addition to supporting Taiwan's full membership, the United States must oppose any effort by China to interfere with the exchange of information between the WHO and Taiwan. The effectiveness of the WHO relies on the direct flow of information among health experts. Any efforts to curtail the free exchange of information unnecessarily threatens global health and the safety of every nation."

    They conclude: "As global health threats emerge, the public health of our nation increasingly depends on cooperation and communication between every nation. It is in America's best interest to ensure that Taiwan is a full member of the WHO."

    FAPA President Bob Yang, PhD states: "We agree with the Senators that the secret PRC-WHO M.O.U. needs to go. This arrangement is not only inconceivable, it is likely unlawful for a multilateral international organization to make bilateral arrangements with one of its members. The bottomline is that the United States and the rest of the world should express its outrage - not only about this M.O.U. arrangement but about China' continued playing of politics with the lives of the people of Taiwan."

    2008年8月2日 美參議員抨擊世衛與中國秘密備忘錄,不滿布希政府欠缺協助台灣參與世衛實質行動 參議員布朗與4位同僚於7月31日 聯署致函布希總統,對於今年五月世衛大會再次拒絕台灣參與深表失望。他們並希望布希總統能夠協助台灣兩千三百萬人民被容納在世衛組織內。參議員布朗自十多年前還是眾議院成員時,就帶頭發起美國國會支持台灣參與世衛,是台灣爭取世衛參與最忠實的國際友人,每年在美國國會以引進議案,發表聲明或是致函等方式,十多年來毫不間斷,為台灣爭取世衛權益不餘遺力。 議員們在信裡表示:「我們很遺憾行政部門無法找到適當管道,讓世衛聽到台灣的聲音。如果我們要有效率地抵抗對全球衛生系統的威脅,台灣的參與是非常重要的。我們籲請您支持台灣世衛會員籍。」 「自從您簽署第107-10號法律,明文規定國務卿支持台灣有意義的參與世衛年度大會,此議題並沒有太大的進展。我們尤其擔心最近國務院呈報給國會的報告裡,並沒有提到任何行政部門在這方面的努力。」 由於中國在2005年與世衛秘書處秘密簽署一份備忘錄,允許中國自行單方決定哪些世衛資訊可以傳達台灣,議員們在信裡表達嚴重的關切。「除了支持台灣的完整會員籍外,美國必須反對任何中國意欲干涉世衛與台灣之間的資訊交流。世衛的效率建立在衛生專家們之間意見與資訊的自由交流。任何阻撓資訊自由交流的意圖,將威脅到全球衛生體系與各國的健康安全。」 議員們在信函結尾表示:「當全球健康體系受到威脅時,美國本身的公衛更須逐漸依賴世界各國之間的合作與溝通無阻。也因此,台灣成為世衛完整會員國一員是符合美國的利益之內。」 FAPA會長楊英育表示:「我們和這幾位參議員的看法一致,世衛與中國的秘密備忘錄必須立即中止。這份備忘錄不僅令人難以想像,一個國際組織私下與某一會員國簽署文件可說是違法的,並違背其他組織會員國的權益。最終底線是,美國與國際社會應該針對備忘錄,以及中國持續耍手段,將政治置台灣人民性命之上表達最嚴重的抗議。」


    The Honorable George W. Bush
    The White House1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NWWashington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: We were again disappointed by the World Health Assembly’s (WHA) recent decision to continue its ban on Taiwan’s participation. We regret that the Administration was not able to find ways to make Taiwan’s voice heard in the World Health Organization (WHO). Taiwan’s participation is vital if we are to effectively combat global health threats. We urge you to support and advocate for Taiwan’s membership in the WHO.Very little progress has been made since Public Law No. 107-10 mandated the Secretary of State endorse “meaningful participation” for Taiwan in the WHA. We are concerned that the recent report by the State Department to Congress regarding Taiwan’s participation in the WHO did not mention any administration initiatives in this regard. Public health threats like Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, Extensively Resistant Tuberculosis, and the H5N1 virus are not constrained by national boundaries. Taiwan’s exclusion from the WHO creates a dangerous gap in the exchange of information among countries and puts global health security at risk. Taiwan’s expertise and leadership in combating these global threats must be fully utilized in the global effort to fight these diseases.We agree with recent statements of former Senator Bob Dole, highlighting that “The ca se for admitting Taiwan into the WHO could not be clearer,” as well as his assertion that that there must be a major diplomatic push to support Taiwan’s candidacy. In addition to supporting Taiwan’s participation, the United States must oppose any effort by China to interfere with the exchange of information between the WHO and Taiwan. The effectiveness of the WHO relies on the direct flow of information among health experts. Any efforts to curtail the free exchange of information unnecessarily threatens global health and the safety of every nation. As global health threats emerge, the public health of our nation increasingly depends on cooperation and communication between every nation. It is in America’s best interest to ensure that Taiwan is a member of the WHO. We look forward to hearing from you on this important issue. Sincerely, Sherrod Brown, Jon Tester, Johnny Isakson, David Vitter, Joseph Lieberman

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


    This was followed by a letter from 22 Taiwanese organizations to the IOC...

    August 2, 2008

    CONTACT: Iris Ho (202)280-0166; irisho@fapa.org

    22 TAIWANESE AMERICAN ORGANIZATIONS URGE IOC PRESIDENT TO USE “TAIWAN” DURING BEIJING OLYMPIC GAMES INSTEAD OF “CHINESE, TAIPEI”

    In a letter dated July 31 to Mr. Jacques Rogge, the President of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the heads of 22 Taiwanese American organizations urge Mr. Rogge to accord Taiwan during the Beijing held Olympic Games the name it deserves: "Taiwan."
    Because of pressure from China, Taiwan has been forced for the past three decades to participate in international sports events under th e English tit le "Chinese Taipei," based on a protocol signed with the IOC. An agreement signed between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait in Hong Kong in 1989 states that all sports teams or organizations representing Taiwan will follow IOC regulations when participating in sports events in China.

    The letter was triggered by recent discussions in Beijing about whether the title of the Taiwanese Olympic team should be changed from "Chinese Taipei" to Zhongguo Taibei or "China Taipei. " This would lend further credence to China's irrational and unrealistic claims over Taiwan.

    The organizations write: "We call on you to rethink the designation given to the nation of Taiwan by the IOC. We recommend that you adopt the straightforward and realist name "TAIWAN" in place of the outdated and denigrating moniker "Chinese Taipei."

    They continue: "Recently China attempted to further degrade Taiwan by publicly calling it "China Taipei." This was in clear violation of the IOC decision of 1979. China's nefarious act flew in the face of its own bilateral agreement with Taiwan of 1989 regarding the correct Chinese language translation of "Chinese Taipei." Instead of being a gracious host of the 2008 summer Olympic Games, China is usurping its position to lay territorial claim over Taiwan."

    They conclude: "To ensure that the Olympic motto "Citius, Altius, Fortius" encourages fair athletic competition rather than sinister Chinese maneuver to annex Taiwan, we urge you to accord the island na tion the name it deserves. That name is TAIWAN."

    FAPA President Bob Yang, Ph.D. comments: "Chinese Taipei" and "China Taipei" are names concocted by communist China to further bully Taiwan in the international community into accepting that Taiwan is a part of China. It is incontestable reality though that Taiwan is not a part of China. It is therefore high time that the international community open its eyes and face and accept the reality that Taiwan is a sovereign independent country whose name is=2 0"Taiwan" - nothing more, nothing less."


    2008年8月2日
    台美人呼籲國際奧委會主席於北京奧運上稱呼台灣,而非中華台北


    22個台美人社團領袖於今日連署致函國際奧委會主席羅格(Jacques Rogge),呼籲他在北=E 4奧運典禮上以「台灣」之名稱呼台灣。

    台美社團領袖們主要是有鑑於目前台灣國內就中華台北或是中國台北名稱的相關辯論,有感而發並進而發起這項聯署信函。

    信中表示:「我們希望您能重新審視奧委會給=E 4台灣的=E 5稱。我們建議您採取直接與符合現實的做法,以=E 5灣之名稱呼台灣,=E 8不是過時與有損國格的中華台北。」

    「近來中國一再稱呼台灣為中國台北,這是很明顯的違反國際奧委會1979年的決議。中國醜惡的行為與1989年簽署的雙方協定背道而馳。中國原本應是一個大方的奧運地主國,卻反而企圖藉名稱炒作,侵佔台灣B 8權。」

    「為了確保奧運精神能夠鼓勵公平的選手競爭,而不是中國意欲併吞台灣,我們呼籲您給予這個島國她值得的名稱:台灣。」

    FAPA會長楊英育表示:「中華台北與中國台北都是共產中國為了恐嚇台灣,脅迫國際社會承認台灣為中國的一部份所衍生出來的名稱。台灣很明顯地不是中國的一部份,國際社會應該認清接受台灣是一個主權獨立的國家的事實。」



    July 31, 2008

    Mr. Jacques Rogge, President
    International Olympic Committee
    Chateau de Vidy
    Lausanne 1007
    Switzerland

    Dear Mr. Rogge:

    We, the under signed representatives=2 0of Taiwanese-American and allied organizations, call on you to rethink the designation given to the nation of Taiwan by the International Olympic Committee (IOC.) We recommend that you adopt the straightforward and realist name "T AIWAN" in place of the outdated and denigrating moniker "Chinese Taipei."

    Much has changed since that fateful decisi on of the IOC in 1979. During the ensuing thirty years, Taiwan has evolved from a land occupied by the Nationalist Chinese to a free and democratic country. In the process, the people of Taiwan have come to view themselves as distinct and separate from the citizens of China. In poll after poll, the vast majority of the island's inhabitants identify themselves as Taiwanese rather than Chinese. Equally important, Taiwan has satisfied all the qualifications of a state according to the Montevideo Convention. The three democratically elected Taiwan presidents-Lee Teng-hui, Chen Shui-bian and Ma Ying-jeou, have all proclaimed that the sovereignty of Taiwan belong to the twenty-three million people of Taiwan. Given these facts, "Chinese Taipei" is hardly a fitting designation for Taiwan in international sports or other activities.

    Recently China attempted to further degrade Taiwan by publicly calling it "China Taipei." This was in clear violation of the IOC decision of 1979. China's nefarious act flew in the face of its own bilateral agreement with Taiwan of 1989 regarding the correct Chinese language translation of "Chinese Taipei." Instead of being a gracio us host of=2 0the 2008 summer Olympic Games,
    China is usurping its position to lay territorial claim over Taiwan.

    To ensure that the Olympic motto "Citius, Altius, Fortius" encourages fair athletic competition ra ther than sinister Chinese maneuver to annex Taiwan, we urge you to accord the island nation the name it deserves. That name is TAIWAN.

    Sincere yours,

    Fred Baehner, President American Taiwan Society Jack Chen, President Austin Institute for Taiwan Studies Adam Huang, President Chhong-Bi Memorial Fund Kang-Hou Wang, President Dr. Kang-Lu Wang Memorial Foundation Terri Giles, Executive Director Formosa Foundation
    Pearl Tang, President Formosan Association for Human Rights Bob I. Yang, President Formosan Association for Public Affairs Mary Helen Cruz, President Friends of Taiwan, Inc. Je-Chin Han, President North America Taiwanese Professors' Association Sue Lee, President North America Taiw anese Women's Association Jung Tsai, President North American Taiwanese Medical Association Ben Pin-Shuo Liu, President Professor Chen Wen-chen Memorial Foundation
    Josephine Pan, President Taiwan Elite Alliance David Lai, President Taiwan Hakka Association for Public Affairs in North America Ma-chi Chen, President Taiwanese American Federation of Northern California Ron Shieh, President Taiwanese Association of America Tzuhui Chen, Spokesperson Taiwanese Collegian Fred H. Wang, President Taiwanese Hakka Association of America Peter N.P. Lo, President Taiwanese Hakka Association of the World Susan Chang, President World Federation of Taiwanese Associations C.K. Kuo, Coordinator World Taiwanese Congress James S. Chen, Chairman World United Formosans for Independence-U.S.A.

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


    Harpers on US China Policy

    Yum...mei hua rou in honey-cumin BBQ sauce. Speaking of easy meat, ever wonder why our foreign policy Establishment is so pro-China? Ken Silverstein has the answer in this month's Harpers....

    One of Barack Obarna's chief advisers on Asia policy is Jeffrey Bader, who frequently writes opinion pieces about China and is regularly quoted in the press on Washington-Beijing relations. Bader has been a commentator on CNN, Fox News, ABC's Nightline, and NPR, among other outlets. He frequently speaks before university, think-tank, and business audiences on the subjects of China and East Asia, and has testified on numerous occasions before various congressional committees. During the Clinton years he held top positions at the State Department and the National Security Council; under George W. Bush, he served as an assistant United States trade representative, leading the team that completed negotiations on China's accession to the World Trade Organization. In 2005, Bader joined the Brookings Institution, and invariably this is the affiliation cited when he publishes op-eds or delivers speeches. Hence, teaders and listeners must imagine that Bader isa neutral, impartial observer when he opines, as he has in recent years, that congressional opposition to China's bid for Unocal was essentially irrational and "vitriolic," or that (as he told USA Today earlier this year) "the U.S.-China relationship is a very important relationship to the U.S. for political, security and economic terms. It's not in the American interest to see an Olympic games that turns into a confrontation between China and the rest of the world."

    When Bader retired from government in 2002, he went to work for Stonebridge International, one of the most sought-after advisory firms in Washington, at which he consulted on behalf of companies looking to do business in China. As is true of many consultancies, Stonebridge's stated mission seems intentionally hazy: according to the firm's website, it "works together with top multinationals to develop and implement tailored strategies to solve critical problems .... Stonebridge understands how governments around the world operate and we are in a position to help our clients navigate the system to achieve their specific objectives." Somewhat more can be gleaned from a few case studies touted on the site-in one such study, a major metals manufacturer hoping to purchase factories in Russia ran up against "deep-rooted opposition from the influential Russian scientific community," which Stonebridge helped "to neutralize"; in another, "a major U.S. chemical company," facing the potential ban of one of its products by the European Union, turned to Stone bridge for "an overall industry strategy together with white papers outlining the product's usefulness and safety." (The unnamed product remains on the market.)

    Stonebridge might best be seen as a sort of one-stop shop for international fixers - a collection of former government officials who replicate, in privatized and miniaturized form, the official foreign-policy apparatus. Both the clients and the former officials benefit immensely from the exchange: for the latter, Stonebridge serves as a holding pen in which to draw a prodigious salary while awaiting a return to the State Department, say, or the Commerce Department, or the National Security Council. Stonebridge's cofounder is Sandy Berger, who before joining the Clinton Administration (in which he became the top national-security adviser) coordinated
    business lobbying for China at the law firm of Hogan & Hartson. He was perhaps the foremost architect of the administration's dramatic shift in China policy; which moved in short order from solidarity with the spirit of Tiananmen Square to the promotion of trade above all else.

    Given Berger's involvement, it is not surprising that Stonebridge has a tremendous and direct stake in greater American engagement with China. The firm is a member of the U.S.-China Business Council, which pushes for close American ties with Beijing. Indeed, Stonebridge maintains an entire Chinese subsidiary, with offices in Beijing and Shanghai, whose purpose is to help transportation, energy, pharmaceutical, and technology firms to cut deals in China. Four former senior U.S. government officials are listed as holding posts at Stonebridge China: Bader, the Obama adviser; Kenneth Lieberthal, who was a top China adviser to Hillary Clinton and who served as senior director for Asia at the National Security Council during her husband's administration; Henry Levine, who was a senior adviser on China trade policy during the present Bush Administration; and Amy Celico, who during the Clinton years served assenior director for China affairs at the U.S. trade representative's office. These officials are almost never identified in the press as Stonebridge affiliates; instead, they are identified merely as former government officials or as representatives of various think tanks - though even at such supposedly independent think tanks, it should be noted, China policy is hardly less compromised. Brookings, for example, bestowed upon Jeffrey Bader the directorship of
    its John L. Thornton China Center, which is named after the chairman of the institution's board of directors and one of its leading donors; Thornton is also a director not only of corporations with huge interests in China (Ford, News Corporation) but also of large Chinese corporations (Commercial Bank of China, China Netcorn), and is even a professor at Tsinghua University.

    Yeesh. Not much you can say about devastating take down like that. I'm not picking on Obama, this is just an excerpt; the same applies to the McCain side. As the piece concludes:

    Yet either man will find it difficult to revamp our foreign policy in any serious way, for one simple reason: a major overhaul would require disentangling ourselves from the reality of empire. And those charged with setting our course, our so called foreign-policy experts (including my source on Africa mentioned above, who has informally advised one of this year's leading presidential candidates), are themselves so entangled overseas as to make envisioning fresh ideas unlikely, if not impossible. When it comes to China, a President Obama or a President McCain might periodically hold forth with tough, politically calculated rhetoric against the regime. But in terms of actual policy, Beijing will continue to be treated as a business partner-precisely the role that it plays for our own mandarin class.
    Yup. I've uploaded the entire piece (~2.71 meg PDF).

    Preventive Defense Project Goes to Taiwan/China

    Harvard's Preventive Defense Project led a delegation to Taiwan and China in June and July. The results are up on its website. They are a good guide to how the US Establishment reads Taiwan-China relations....

    From June 22 to July 1, 2008, PDP Co-Directors William J. Perry and Ashton B. Carter led a bipartisan civilian/military delegation to Taipei and Beijing to discuss Cross-Strait issues, regional security concerns, and the U.S.-China strategic relationship. The meetings were planned in coordination with the National Committee for U.S.-China Relations, the Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the China Foundation for International and Strategic Studies (CFISS).

    The timing of the 2008 visit was particularly fortuitous, as the PDP delegation visited Asia just as Taiwan and mainland China ended their first formal talks in nearly a decade. Taiwan's President Ma Ying-jeou took office on May 20, after campaigning on pledges to bolster Taiwan's economy through stronger trade and transit ties with mainland China. Taiwan and Beijing held their first direct bilateral discussions just days before the PDP delegation arrived, in which both sides agreed to take important steps to improve relations across the Strait.

    All parties acknowledged an historic - but limited - window of opportunity to make meaningful progress toward a more peaceful, stable, and lasting arrangement between Taipei and Beijing.

    In its meetings with officials in Taipei and Beijing, the U.S. delegation encouraged leaders on both sides to seize this opportunity for progress. While many challenges remain, the American delegation worked with its counterparts on both sides of the Strait to identify additional steps all parties might take to further improve regional stability.

    The group met with Taiwan's top leaders, including President Ma Ying-jeou, Vice President Vincent Siew, National Security Council Secretary General Su Chi, Defense Minister Chen Chao-min, Foreign Minister Francisco Ou, Chairperson of the Mainland Affairs Council Lai Shin-yuan, KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung, and DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen. They also met with key Chinese officials at the Central Military Commission, including General Xu Caihou, Major General Chen Xiaogong, and Lieutenant General Ma Xiaotian, as well as President of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) Mr. Chen Yunlin, and Lt. General Liu Chengjun at the Academy of Military Science (AMS).

    The full report is online here. The complete Taiwan list of people me includes...

    Dr. Chang King-yuh, Chairman, Foundation on International and Cross-Strait Studies (FICS) Mr. Chen Chao-min Minister of National Defense, Mr. Hau Po-Tsan. Premier 1990-1993 and was Defense Minister from 1989-1990, Mr. Jason Hu, Mayor, Taichung City Dr. Jiang Bo-wei Associate Professor, Kinmen Research Group at the Institute of Technology, Dr. Lai Shin-yuan Chairperson, Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), Executive Yuan Mr. Lee Chu-feng Magistrate, Kinmen County Ms. Stacey C.H. Lin Officer, Department of North American Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Lt. General Lu Sheau Jung Commanding General, Kinmen Defense Command Dr. Ma Ying-jeou President of Taiwan Mr. Tom McGowan Past Chairman, American Chamber of Commerce in Taipei; Partner, Russin & Vecchi Mr. Francisco H.K. Ou Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Don Shapiro Director of Publications and Editor in Chief, Taiwan Business Topics Hon. Vincent S. Siew Vice President of Taiwan Dr. Su Chi Secretary-General, National Security Council Mr. Tsai Chiang-Hwa Deputy Director, Department of North American Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Dr. Tsai Ing-wen Chairperson, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Ms. Tung Tai-Chin Chairperson, American Chamber of Commerce in Taipei; Country Head, Fidelity International Ms. Andrea Wu Executive Director, American Chamber of Commerce in Taipei Mr. Wu Poh-hsiung Chairman, Kuomintang (KMT) Dr. Stephen Young Director of the Taipei Office, American Institute in Taiwan.
    ....aside from DPP Chair Tsai Ing-wen, the delegation met with no one from Taiwan who supports independence and democracy for the island -- it even met with Hau Po-tsun, the reactionary right-winger who fought Lee Teng-hui's democratization program, and Jason Hu, the happy-go-lucky mayor of Taichung whom no one would confuse with a competent public official with a powerful influence on foreign affairs. The delegation's findings were naturally shaped by the fact that they didn't talk with any local on the Taiwan side who gives a shit about the future of Taiwan -- for example, the thought that China's increasing ascendancy over the KMT might be bad for the island's democratic future isn't expressed anywhere herein....nor does anyone wonder out loud what happens to US security if Taiwan falls into the PRC's orbit (never mind Japan's security. What's Japan?). The Project also didn't seem to notice that the KMT has very little leverage in the "negotiations" and that if they are to proceed rapidly, then it will have even less leverage. (note: all emphasis is mine).

    1. All of our government interlocutors in Taiwan, from the President on down, indicated they wished to move forward, step by step (from economic, to international space, on to security issues) to achieve long-term stabilization of the Taiwan Strait. This three-part partition of the prospects for progress – in increasing order of difficulty and complexity – was echoed on the mainland.[MT: the report uses euphemisms. By "stabilization" the Ma and Beijing governments mean "throttling of the island's independent existence" and "suppressing its democratic development."]
    2. In various ways and with various words, all our interlocutors indicated there currently is a window of opportunity in cross-Strait relations that has not existed since the 1990s and probably not since 1949.[MT: sadly, the opportunity has always been there but China's desire to annex the island prevented the establishment of peaceful relations. Of course that thought will not appear in an Establishment document like this, where the barrier to progress is the crazed Chen Shui-bian and his insane desire to live in an independent, democratic state.]
    3. Because of both foreseeable and unforeseeable events (such as either diminished support for the Ma government as it makes hard decisions, or as the world economy deteriorates), this window of opportunity probably will not remain open indefinitely. There is a need for all parties to move positively and as rapidly as conditions permit.[MT: Why is there a need for rapid movement? The window of opportunity will always exist -- all that has to happen is for China to grow up on the Taiwan issue. Yes, I know... fat chance.]
    4. Our delegation heard clearly in Taipei that sound ties with Washington are central to Taiwan being confident enough to proceed boldly with the mainland. All Taiwan Government interlocutors stated unequivocally that they wished to see U.S. weapons sales notifications go to the Congress. They argued that Taiwan needed to be a “hard ROC,” difficult for the PRC to coerce, in order for Taiwan to move forward with the mainland from a position of confidence and strength.
    5. Both sides see the first basket – economic issues – as being the most straightforward. First there will be direct cross-Strait passenger (“charter”) flights (still going through Hong Kong airspace), then cargo, then sea lanes, etc. Restrictions on Taiwan investment on the mainland and PRC investment on Taiwan will also be eased over time. PRC tourism to Taiwan is growing rapidly.[MT: PRC tourism to Taiwan hasn't budged. Hopefully that's a temporary thing. Note that the DPP bundled cargo links, while the KMT has removed them -- as a commentator noted in the Taipei Times last week, the KMT removed them at Beijing's demand. The KMT has no leverage in these negotiations, especially if things are to proceed rapidly, a point missed by the fact-finding delegation.]
    6. In Taiwan, there was the expectation that economic relations would make rapid progress and that the next set of issues – political issues, especially “international space” for Taiwan – would constitute a litmus test for PRC sincerity. [MT: Note that after the CCP screwed Taiwan on the Olympic name affair, Ma hailed its goodwill. What does that tell you about the need for Beijing's sincerity?], The Ma government states quite clearly that it understands that its participation in international organizations must be functional and not of a character that connotes statehood. Taiwan is prepared to adopt different names in different organizations. We received the impression on the mainland that progress on the World Health Assembly (WHA) is likely. [MT: You know what will happen. In the end, this will not be permitted.] All the Taiwan leaders also called for a “diplomatic cease-fire,” whereby Taiwan would retain the 23 countries that currently recognize it, the mainland would retain the 171 that currently recognize it, and neither side would contest recognition of the other. Taiwan stresses that by agreeing to such a cease-fire, the mainland will positively affect Taiwan popular attitudes. But officials on the mainland were non-committal on this issue.[MT: See? China will betray the Establishments in both the US and Taiwan.]
    7. Ma Ying-jeou won the March election with 58 percent of the vote,1 but he is most worried about the 42 percent of voters who opposed him. His strategy for the future is to build a light blue/light green coalition (the middle of the Taiwan political spectrum). Therefore, he needs quick victories to consolidate his support in the center. It is in this context that responsiveness on issues like WHA from the mainland is key. If Ma loses the center of the Taiwan polity, the “window of opportunity” closes. PRC officials voice a concern that is also related to politics on Taiwan: what if the mainland gives ground on international space now, only to find that the Kuomintang (KMT) loses to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in a few years and the gains are exploited for the purpose of pursuing independence? [MT: Doesn't your heart bleed for the poor PRC expansionists who might get cheated of an island China has never owned?]
    8. Currently, Taiwan sees no reduction in the actual level of threat represented by the PRC military force posture in the Taiwan Strait area as a result of the KMT victory. However, President Ma was favorably “surprised” by President Hu Jintao’s initiative on a “peace agreement” in October 2007. Taiwan affirmatively wants the U.S. to move forward on arms sales, as noted above. Chinese officials continue to suggest that the PLA’s intermediate range missile deployments facing Taiwan are on the table in some unspecified manner for a deal involving the U.S., as stated by Jiang Zemin to President Bush in 2002 (though it must be borne in mind that Chinese missile deployments are significantly larger now than they were in 2002).
    9. In Taiwan, we authoritatively heard that Taiwan wishes to proceed in establishing “representative offices” of some sort (preferably Straits Exchange Foundation and ARATS) but there was understanding this might take some time. There was some confusion in last spring’s visit of Wu Poh-hsiung on this issue.
    10. On the mainland in our meetings with Chen Yunlin (chairman of ARATS) and Xu Caihou (Deputy Chair of the Central Military Commission), we heard understanding of the situation, moderation, an expression of intention to meaningfully respond, a sense that things would move rapidly on the economic front, and that progress would be more measured on the international space and security fronts. We were given to expect positive movement in the WHA in the not too distant future. Reading between the lines, these senior officials are still trying to interpret the wishes of Hu Jintao, who has made a number of forward-leaning statements on cross-Strait issues since Ma’s election. We heard a bit of anxiety from the PLA that the “1992 Consensus”, to the degree it emphasizes “respective interpretations” could become a slippery slope heading toward “two Chinas.”
    Enjoy. Reading the findings, I'm cautiously optimistic that at some point Beijing is going to screw this up mightily. And observe that there was no mention of "democracy" either as a thing worth preserving in Taiwan, or as a political evolution that might occur in the PRC. There is no pretense that "Taiwan is going to change China" in documents like this.

    Saturday, August 02, 2008

    Quickies on the market and on the arms freeze

    China Times reports KMT Legislator Lin Yu-fang, long involved in defense issues, says that Taiwan asked three times for F-16s:

    立法委員訪問團七月卅一日在華府指出,兩年來,中華民國政府三度向美國提交F-16C/D戰機的採購意向書,可是三度遭到美國政府退回具體日期,分別是二○○六年七月廿七日、○七年二月十三日以及○七年六月廿二日。美國還要求台灣不要再提。

    The dates in the penultimate sentence are 2006 July, 2007 Feb, and again in 2007 June. The last sentence says that the US then asked that Taiwan not bring up the issue again. Note that Bush Administration has claimed (a) there is no arms freeze and (b) that it dates from after the election of Ma, because the KMT asked the Administration to freeze arms sales because they didn't want to disturb President Ma's delicate surrender negotiations talks with Beijing. Again note that (a) and (b) contradict each other, and both contradict known facts. If the Bush Administration were any more full of shit, the President would need sewage permits to hold a press conference.

    Ma save us! The property market slowdown continues!

    The local property market continued its slowdown last month with market watchers expressing mixed views about its future prospects, a statement released yesterday said.

    Evertrust Rehouse’s (永慶房屋) survey found that residential property prices in the greater Taipei area saw a 10 percent month-on-month decline to average NT$267,000 (US$8,670) per ping (3.3m²) last month while trading volume dropped by 15 percent in the same period.

    ....

    The real-estate index, co-compiled by Chang and Cathay Real Estate Development Co (國泰建設), the nation’s second largest developer, showed that the 30-day trading volume indicator saw a 23.49 percent year-on-year decline in the second quarter of this year to reach 412 points, although closing prices saw a 6.15 percent growth at the same time, to average NT$195,500 per ping nationwide in the second quarter.

    On a quarterly basis, both closing prices and the 30-day trading volume indicator jumped by 2.53 percent and 28.05 percent respectively in the second quarter, Chang said.

    In addition, Evertrust’s survey found that the property market in Taichung saw 30 percent month-on-month decline last month, although average prices remained steady.

    The property market in Kaohsiung, however, appeared to benefit from investments made by Hon Hai Precision Industry Co (鴻海精密), and the launch of the city’s mass rapid transit system, seeing a 5 percent growth in sales last month, compared with June.

    In other areas where Ma was going to save us, the Liberty Times said today we are getting 150 tourists a day from China. Hopefully this is just a temporary depression as everyone gears up for the Olympics.

    Friday, August 01, 2008

    Shieh Acquitted

    During Chen Shui-bian's second term a number of officials were prosecuted for corruption in what looked to many like a deliberate political put up job intended to create the impression that the Administration was corrupt. Today the Taipei Times reported on an acquittal in one of the most outrageous cases:
    The Tainan District Court on Wednesday found former deputy minister of the National Science Council Shieh Ching-jyh (謝清志) innocent of corruption charges.

    Ten defendants, including Shieh and Hsu Hung-chang (許鴻章), owner of Sheus Technologies Corp —also known as Hung Hua Engineering — were indicted in 2006, accused of corruption by a rival bidder after Sheus won an NT$8.05 billion (US$262 million) construction tender to reduce the vibrations caused by the high speed rail as it passes through the Southern Taiwan Science Park.
    I've blogged on this one before, in 2006 at Taiwan Matters! The human cost of this mess should be obvious from this 2006 discussion on the Hyphen Blog (don't miss the comments).

    Stevan Harrell Interviewed in Blogging Beijing, and other tales

    Dr. Stevan Harrell, longtime Taiwan and China scholar who used to live in Taiwan and has produced some wonderful work on it, was interviewed on his work in China and on the Beijing Olympics, on Blogging Beijing. A sample:
    How were you drawn into studying minority people in southwest China?

    After the Mosher affair , it was impossible for foreigners to do field research in Han areas. My student Dru Gladney had done research with Hui in various areas, and encouraged me to give minorities a try.

    For readers who know little about Chinese minorities, what are three essential kernels of information?

    1. There are as many minority people in China as there are people in Japan, and way more than there are in any one European country.
    2. Not all Chinese minorities have active independence movements. In fact, only two of them do: Tibetans and Uighurs.
    3. Minority people participate actively in incorporating themselves into the Chinese state, even when they have resentments against the state and against the Han.

    What do the 2008 Games mean for China - Chinese people, Chinese government, Chinese minorities, and Chinese academics?

    More than anything else, the Games are a chance to show the world that China is a grownup country. That's really about all.

    I've long followed the issue of casinos here in Taiwan, partly because I suspect they will be involved in my PhD thesis. Taiwan Journal has a piece out on the Penghu's desire to get gambling:

    Penghu has good reason to look for a financial boost from casinos as the gambling industry is expanding rapidly in Asia. According to a survey released by the American Gaming Association in June, gambling revenues in the region could surpass those generated in the United States by 2012.

    Booming gambling meccas in Macau as well as new casinos in Singapore were expected to drive this growth, the AGA predicted. The association reported that U.S. casinos raked in US$34.1 billion in 2007, while Asia's casino gambling market was estimated to have made between US$15 billion and US$20 billion during the same period.

    The industry's potential has reignited the debate on whether casinos should be legalized in Taiwan. With neighboring countries such as Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore either preparing to or having already lifted gambling bans, there is a growing sense that Taiwan should jump on the bandwagon before it is too late.

    In order for that to happen, the Legislature would have to pass the so-called "casino article" in the Offshore Islands Development Act. Legislators have already rejected the article twice: in January 2002 by a 51-vote margin and in December last year, by 27 votes.

    An aide to Lin Pin-kuan, a fourth-term independent legislator from Penghu County, suggested it might be a case of third time lucky. While the previous Democratic Progressive Party government was firmly opposed to gambling, the aide said the ruling Kuomintang's position on this issue had softened in recent years.

    "Lawmakers have long blocked the article because many Taiwanese people consider gambling immoral, but the enormous successes of the casino industry in other Asian countries made for a powerful argument," said Lin's aide. "Taiwan has legalized lotteries. People should be able to discuss casinos more reasonably now," he added.

    The water issue is a severe one, but a friend pointed out that casinos might actually be a benefit on that front, since the government might at last put in pipes to bring H2O over from Taiwan instead of straining the delicate local ecosystem.

    ++++++++

    Lastly, the arms freeze. To complement the Senators who wrote to King George on the arms freeze, 25 members of the House Taiwan caucus have also sent a letter to the President asking about it. Below:

    The Honorable George W. Bush July 31, 2008
    President
    The White House Washington , DC 20500

    Dear President Bush:

    For decades, the United States and Taiwan have maintained a mutually beneficial economic and political relationship. Taiwan is one of our strongest allies in the Asia Pacific region and we believe it is essential that there be a peaceful environment in the Taiwan Strait . The U.S. has a long history of making available to Taiwan defense articles and services that are essential in the goal of enabling Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.

    In 2006, Taiwan ranked 5th among worldwide recipients of U.S. foreign military sales, receiving $970 million in defense articles and services. In December 2007, Taiwan approved their 2008 Defense budget which included a significant package of weapons to further its military modernization efforts. Among those requests were 12 P3-C planes and 3 PAC-II missile upgrades which you approved in April, 2001. Other requests that are still pending include 8 diesel submarines, 30 Apache helicopters, E-2 aircraft upgrades, sea-launched Harpoon 20 missiles, precision attack missiles and 66 F-16 fighter aircraft.

    We welcome Taiwan 's request of support for its security and growth of its defense capabilities. Upon reception of Congressional Notifications, we look forward to the opportunity to work with the Administration in completing these sales as soon as possible. Recently, we have been aware of a possible freeze on all foreign military sales to Taiwan . We believe that a freeze on foreign military sales to Taiwan violates the spirit of the Taiwan Relations Act. We request a briefing on the status of these sales from all appropriate agencies, and urge the Administration to expeditiously execute consideration of these requests.

    In March 2007, China announced that their 2007 defense budget would total $46 billion, although Secretary of Defense Gates estimated that China 's total defense spending for 2007 could be as high as $139 billion. The military and strategic imperatives for Taiwan are real and urgent, and if we fail to show the necessary resolve it would mean missing a significant opportunity to improve cross-strait peace and security - a vital U.S. interest.

    We would like to echo your statement on March 22 regarding Taiwan 's recent election, stating that you are "confident that the election and the democratic process it represents will advance Taiwan as a prosperous, secure and well-governed society." We understand our administration' s "One China" policy and all agree that a strong, defendable Taiwan is in our nation's best interests.

    In our view, a secure and prosperous Taiwan requires the means to provide for its own self defense and the ability to engage its neighbors without fear of military intimidation. Taiwan 's ability to maintain its defense rests heavily upon its ability to acquire defense articles that are capable of deterring aggressive neighbors. As your statement also points out, Taiwan has a right to be "secure," and that can only be guaranteed by an unambiguous and non-negotiable commitment from the United States to provide Taiwan with weapons systems consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act.

    Sincerely,

    SHELLEY BERKLEY D-NV STEVE CHABOT R-OH GENE GREEN D-TX VIRGINIA FOXX R-NC ELLIOT ENGEL D-NY 05 THADDEUS MCCOTTER R-MI MICHAEL MCNULTY D-NY TOM TANCREDO R-CO MAURICE HINCHEY D-NY DAN BURTON R-IN ROBERT ANDREWS D-NJ MARK SOUDER R-IN SHEILA JACKSON-LEE D-TX ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN R-FL BARNEY FRANK D-MA 15 DOUG LAMBORN R-CO STEVE ROTHMAN D-NJ JOHN CULBERSON R-TX G.K. BUTTERFIELD D-NC JOE BARTON R-TX 20 DONNA CHRISTENSEN D-VI SCOTT GARRETT R-NJ DAVID WU D-OR
    GUS BILIRAKIS R-FL DENNIS CARDOZA D-CA 25

    The Taipei Times had several pieces on the arms issue today. Dennis Wilder of the US NSC says there's no arms freeze. Legislators say there is no realistic possibility of arms sales this year. J Michael Cole says that US arms freeze is example of US hegemony at work.