Nelson Report on Ma Visit

A friend of mine passed this along to me. Read it against my earlier post on Taiwan Communique on Ma Visit.

The report presents the hob-nobbing as generally successful for Ma, which I tend to agree with. He appears not have gotten called on his lies, although there was widespread skepticism about his grandiose vision for Taiwan's future as a Chinese protectorate.

SUMMARY: Taipei Mayor and KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeo is on his way to the West Coast after what must be seen as a very successful miission to Washington, with meetings at a higher level than any accorded a Taiwanese official in many years. Although Ma and Administration officials played by the "rules"and wouldn't admit to who met whom, nor what the US officials may have said, the lineup, from yesterday, was as follows:

Wednesday at the Metropolitian Club, 3 PM, Asst. Secretary of State for East Asia & the Pacific Chris Hill, and his two principal China deputies, Taiwan Desk chief Ford Hart, and special advisor Jim Keith, who has been keeping the China DAS slot warm until Princeton prof Tom Christensen completes his clearance process; following the State team, Ma met, in separate meetings of roughly 30-40 minutes, White House Deputy National Security Advisor J.D. Crouch and his China director, Dennis Wilder...and finally, at 5:15, Deputy Secretary of State Bob Zoellick.

The report also notes that Ma was seen as constructive.

More generally, informed sources indicate that Ma's presentation (basically the same as his speeches yesterday at AEI/Heritage, and this morning, at Brookings/CSIS) was seen as a constructive contribution to helping meet US concerns. Specifically, one source characterized a meeting as "very positive, very impressive in terms of what he wants to do." That is, while it's good he reinforced the "5 noes" its great that he adds the "5 dos" this source explained. "It's impressive to hear from a Taiwanese political leader how to get to a constructive future." Noting the US concerns about the feuding between the KMT and DPP, this source said that Ma explained that he thinks most of the Taiwanese people don't support either independence or unification, so he is trying to find a way between those two paths. It is a measure of the collegiality of the Administration meetings that this morning, Ma joked with his Brookings/CSIS audience about trading stories of his days at Harvard...but kept the unofficial/off the record rules by not naming fellow alums Rodman and Zoellick; this followed much Ivy League bandinage yesterday with Yale man Jim Lilley, the former Ambassador to China, Korea and head of AIT.

The KMT's strategy of paralyzing Taiwan to make trouble between the US and the DPP has really paid off. Here America's so-called "experts" can see Ma as a constructive force though it is his party that has created the paralysis in Taiwan governance and his party that wants to move Taiwan into the China embrace and out of the US orbit (and totally reject cooperation with Japan). A complete snow job. The KMT is light-years ahead of the DPP in handling US decision-makers. The Nelson Report correctly notes, however, that the arms purchase is a critical test: if Ma actually makes concrete moves to unblock the paralysis and purchase the arms, then the US may actually come to believe he can be a constructive force. Further down, the Report notes:

We noted in last night's Report the obvious discomfort of conservative US think-tank China/Taiwan watchers with what they see as the obvious implication of Ma's "5 do's" proposals, should the PRC ever find a way to actually deal with a KMT-led government in ways acceptable to the political requirements in Taipei....that is, that a KMT-led "modus vivendi" (Ma's term) with the Mainland which led to a security arrangement of some kind would, by definition, take Taiwan out of the US forward defense posture in the Western Pacific.

Ma was questioned again on this today, and argued that the US should welcome any such Taiwan-China arrangement, since by definition it would lower tensions in the Strait, and thus in East Asia, and so make it easier for the US to carry out its mission of helping to preserve the peace and stability of the region, so that economic development...and progress on democracy...is enhanced.

Ma is selling a hill of beans. A Taiwan in China's orbit does not merely create a hole in the US security arrangements. It totally isolates Japan. To read this move correctly, one must see Ma's deliverance of Taiwan into China's arms as something aimed at Japan as well -- for both the Chinese Nationalists in Taiwan and their allies in Beijing hate the Japanese. Again, it is worth asking why a Japan-hating, China-loving politician like Ma whose long-term goal is to annex Taiwan to China, will participate in a regional security alliance aimed at China, with Taiwan at its center. The Report does observe that conservatives and DPP supporters were not convinced by Ma's performance.

Inevitably, a Chinese challenge to US security arrangements in Asia is a challenge to Japan as well, for anyone who wishes to be the regional hegemon must deal with both the US and Japan. By swallowing Taiwan, China deals a blow to the positions of both those nations. I hope US experts will ponder deeply the true implications of having a pro-China politician like Ma Ying-jeou at the head of the government of Taiwan.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Japan] [Chen Shui-bian] [Ma Ying-jeou] [Taiwan Independence] [Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)] [US Foreign Policy]

The History of the Taiwan Assembly

Taiwan News has a long article outlining the island's attempts to get itself a representative assembly. It gives a good feel of what it is a like to be a colonial population for a century.....

Establishing a Taiwan representative assembly was the initial goal of local democracy activists. It took 98 years, from since the short-lived Taiwan Republic founded the first local assembly in 1895, to when Taiwanese people elected a general congress in 1993.

Though mostly symbolic, the Taiwan Republic established the assembly in 1895 as part of its plan to create the first democratic republic in East Asia.

Two decades later, the islanders kicked off a campaign to establish a Taiwan Representative Assembly under Japanese colonial rule.

The promulgation of Japan Law No. 63, which outlined rules for governing Taiwan, made it clear that the colony would be managed by a Japanese governor under different regulations from those observed by the government in Tokyo.

The law authorized the Japanese governor of Taiwan to rule the island according to his own discretion. The governor was empowered to promulgate administrative orders, instead of seeking statutory grounds provided by the Japan Diet (Parliament).

At the end of World War I, driven by the prevailing ideal of national self-determination, a number of young Taiwanese, including some who had returned from studying in Japan, launched a campaign of peaceful resistance to colonization. They formed various groups to promote the movement.

The discussions among these intellectuals on abolishing Law No. 63 resulted in a range of diverse opinions.

The most noted proposal, made by Lin Cheng-lu in 1920, presented a view that differed from the movement's priority of revoking the special law. Lin suggested that the pursuit of a representative system that would give Taiwanese the power of legislation would be a more substantive goal than striving to strip the Japanese governor of his legislative power.

Many advocates of autonomy endorsed Lin's view. They thought that abolishing Law No. 63 could prove unfavorable to Taiwan's democratic development.

They did not want to risk assimilation under the Tokyo government if the special law was replaced by the full legislative system of Japan, whose social customs and traditions were different from those of Taiwan.

In a bid to attain the goal of establishing a representative assembly, advocates filed 15 petitions with Tokyo's Empire Parliament from 1921 to 1934, seeking Japanese congressmen's support to push for the government to allow representative autonomy in Taiwan.

Staging sit-in demonstrations outside the empire parliament, Taiwanese petitioners informed the Japanese congressmen that the key to realizing constitutional governance in Taiwan was to ensure that the colony's residents would not suffer any form of discrimination, such as exclusion from political participation.

[Taiwan] [China] [Japan] [Taiwan Independence]

Ma Ying-Jeou: the other Security Risk

I thought I'd highlight this for a moment because it shows the other problem that Ma and the Chinese Nationalists have. This is from the WaPo article I discussed yesterday -- Meanwhile...on the other side of the Lake, Japan....:

Not everyone in Taiwan shares that sentiment, particularly members of the opposition Nationalist Party, which favors closer ties with China. Earlier this year, the party took offense when Japanese and Taiwanese groups jointly erected a monument in a Taipei suburb honoring thousands of aboriginal Taiwanese who died fighting for the Japanese Imperial Army in Southeast Asia. A few weeks later, most of the monument was ordered dismantled by local Nationalist Party officials.

Ma Ying-jeou, the Nationalist Party chief who opinion polls indicate is the favorite to win Taiwan's 2008 presidential election, described the incident as a good example of the emotions that could be unleashed if the embrace of Japan goes too far.

Taiwanese who revel in the Japanese colonial years "are still brainwashed," Ma said. "It was not a just war, and Taiwan could have done better" without the citizens who now recall that period with fondness.

Everyone knows that Taiwan's security requires cooperation with the US. But there doesn't seem to be much clear-headed realization that Taiwan's security is going to require cooperation with Japan as well. Yet the Chinese Natonalists hate the Japanese. How can a Japan-hating, China-loving, pro-annexation politician operate a security alliance that is aimed at China and has Taiwan at its heart?

People who think Ma is going to be good for Taiwan are dreaming.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Japan] [Chen Shui-bian] [Ma Ying-jeou] [Taiwan Independence] [Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)] [US Foreign Policy]

Meanwhile...on the other side of the Lake, Japan....

......is growing ever closer to Taiwan. The Washington Post has a story on it today.

With Japan seeking to shed a half-century of pacifism and reassert itself in world affairs, and China acquiring vastly larger economic and military might, relations between the two are as tense as they have been at any time since World War II.

Nowhere is their contest more visible than here in Taiwan, which China regards as a renegade province that must be reunified with the mainland, by force if necessary. In recent months, Japan has made a series of unprecedented overtures toward Taiwan, which was a Japanese colony from 1895 to 1945. In Tokyo, leading politicians are increasingly adopting the view that Japan must come to the island's aid in the event of Chinese aggression.

Many analysts say they believe Japan's evolving interest in Taiwan could tilt the regional balance of power. The United States, which has diplomatic relations with mainland China, is nonetheless sworn by the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 to defend the island territory if it is attacked.

Still can't get that TRA right. Note to self: write everybody! Meanwhile Ma Ying-jeou, former secretary to a murderous dictator, complains of brainwashing:

In contrast with the Chinese and Koreans both North and South, many Taiwanese view the years of Japanese colonial rule in sympathetic terms. Older Taiwanese often delight in speaking Japanese, the official language of their youth. Imperial-era structures, including the elegant Presidential Office Building that was once the seat of the Japanese governor, have been painstakingly preserved and declared national treasures.

Japan and Taiwan are exchanging a record 2.3 million tourists each year, and Japan remains Taiwan's largest trading partner. Large Japanese department stores and fast-food chains dominate the Taipei cityscape.

"The Japanese built universities, roads and other infrastructure. They educated us, they turned us into a more modern society," said Hwang Kuan-hu, a national policy adviser to Chen. "We welcome Japan becoming more involved again with Taiwan."

Not everyone in Taiwan shares that sentiment, particularly members of the opposition Nationalist Party, which favors closer ties with China. Earlier this year, the party took offense when Japanese and Taiwanese groups jointly erected a monument in a Taipei suburb honoring thousands of aboriginal Taiwanese who died fighting for the Japanese Imperial Army in Southeast Asia. A few weeks later, most of the monument was ordered dismantled by local Nationalist Party officials.

Ma Ying-jeou, the Nationalist Party chief who opinion polls indicate is the favorite to win Taiwan's 2008 presidential election, described the incident as a good example of the emotions that could be unleashed if the embrace of Japan goes too far.

Taiwanese who revel in the Japanese colonial years "are still brainwashed," Ma said. "It was not a just war, and Taiwan could have done better" without the citizens who now recall that period with fondness.

The memorial commemorates a swath of Taiwanese history that the KMT would like everyone to forget -- that Japan once ruled Taiwan, and that the Taiwanese served it. The "emotions" that Ma fears are pro-Taiwan and pro-Japan. Japanese rule might be idealized, but there is no harm in today's embrace of Japan by Taiwanese.

The article unfortunately recapitulates the Chen-is-crazed propaganda theme so common in the international media:

U.S. officials have cautiously welcomed the more assertive Japanese stance. But they have also expressed concern that too sudden a shift could embolden Chen, Taiwan's president, to take steps toward formal independence that could ignite a cross-strait conflict.

The idea that the DPP is a bunch of crazed madman who will ignite a war that will destroy the island they love is strictly KMT bilge. Chen's leadership style may be lacking, but he is hardly going to commit political and physical suicide by formenting armed conflict in the Taiwan Straits. The DPP came to power against an authoritarian regime that murdered and imprisoned its political opponents. They didn't do so by being crazed, knee-jerk loonies. It is high time this tale was put to bed too.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Japan] [Chen Shui-bian] [Ma Ying-jeou] [Taiwan Independence] [Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)] [US Foreign Policy]

Taiwan Communique on Ma Visit

Gerrit van der Wees, Editor, Taiwan Communique, passed this around Taiwan Focus:

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

Hereby a brief summary of what we were able to see and hear of Mr. Ma's visit here in Washington.

Yesterday (March 22nd) he gave a public speech at the American Enterprise Institute, where he was grilled by our friends Dan Blumenthal and John Tkacik on his stance w.r.t. the arms package. Dan and John found him very evasive, and he repeated that today at Brookings (morning) and National Press Club (afternoon).

In telegraph staccato, his speech has the following elements: He himself was made in Taiwan, but delivered in HK. East Asia has two flashpoints: Taiwan Strait and Korea. The Strait has never been peaceful: from '49 through '79 military conflict and confrontation. After derecognition in 1981 marshall Ye's 9 points. In 1992 the "consensus" on One China, agree to disagree. But this move to conciliation was upset by LTH's State-to-state. After 2000 election, President Chen initially moved in the right direction ("five noes"), but after that he went from bad to worse: one-country on each side, 2003 defensive referendum, and in 2006 the NUC abolishment.

He then said that China and Taiwan should work towards "common vision" of Peace and Prosperity. If KMT comes to power, it will keep the five noes, affirm the status quo. He said the five noes are too passive, and that therefore he proposes the "five do's": 1) resume talks between two sides, 2) work towards a peace accord in which both sides agree neither move towards independence or unification for 50 years. 3) Have Military Confidence Building Measures, 4) try to achieve a modus vivendi on Taiwan's participation in international organizations, based on pragmatism (no details ....), 5) accelerate cultural and educational exchanges, recognize degrees from Chinese universities and accept Chinese students in Taiwan universities.

So much for his presentation. From the Q&A, I pick out two points:

1. This morning at Brookings, Kurt Campbell asked him about the arms package. Ma had a long answer, in which he basically accused the DPP for "doing nothing" between 2001 and 2004, and then "presenting a two-page paper to the LY nine days before the recess." He of course said nothing of the 46 times it was blocked in the LY procedure committee, but stated blandly that because of the tough position of the KMT's LY caucus, the price had now "dropped"from 18 bln. $ to 10 bln.$ .... He said that the KMT's Policy Statement was now ready, but that its passage had been complicated by the NUC abolishment. He said the KMT firmly supports a "reasonable"arms package, ased on four points: a) defense needs, b) Cross Strait situation, 3) finance/costs, 4) public opinion (he said public opinion is now 50/50 divided on the package). This vague answer clearly did not satisfy the Americans.

2) I did raise the issue of reconciliation in Taiwan itself, both this morning at Brookings as well as this afternoon at the NPC. My question was: Mr. Ma, in your presentation, you focus on reconciliation with China, but is reconciliation within Taiwan also a goal for you? It seems that for the KMT it is easier to cross the Taiwan Strait and fly off to Beijing than it is to cross the Katagelan Blvd in Taipei. How do you intend to achieve reconciliation in Taiwan if people like Kuan Chung still give speeches that are so hostile to the democratically-elected government in Taiwan (at a separate Brookings/CSIS seminar on Consolidating Taiwan's Democracy on Wednesday, Kuan Chung gave a confrontational speech in which he blamed the DPP for everything that's wrong in Taiwan -- the Americans present were really shaking their head in disbelief).

At the Brookings session this morning, Ma did not answer my question at all: he went into a explanation of WTO, APEC and trade things .... much to the amazement of the audience. This afternoon at the NPC, he said that reconciliation had been tried by the KMT: Lien Chan in October 2001 (and he had been "betrayed"on the nuclear plant ssue), and James Soong last year (10 points ?), so he (Ma) was very careful. I came back and said that the DPP had an equal number of examples where they felt they had been betrayed by the KMT, and insisted, asking him what he planned to do NOW to bring the people in Taiwan together. He remained very evasive.

OK, so much for now. Sorry to be rather lengthy, but we thought it would be good that you all have an accurate overview of the topics discussed. At least we pushed him hard on some of these issues, but there is a high level of arrogance on his part: they feel they have the "high ground" now, and are taking advantage of that. I am sure many of the Americans are poking holes in his tale, but there will also be quite a number of gullible souls who think this is "very positive."

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

I'll have some more stuff from the Nelson Report up later today. Am cosmically busy with editing and translation work. Damn! I hate it when life interferes with blogging.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Bush] [Chen Shui-bian] [Ma Ying-jeou] [Taiwan Independence] [Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)] [US Foreign Policy]

MoE to Allow Online Education

Taiwan News reports that the MoE is planning to permit local universities to offer online masters degrees that it will recognize. This has some interesting implications for several areas, but it will now be hard for the MoE to recognize local degrees but not recognize online degrees from quality universities overseas. Further, this also seems to be a way for the MoE to permit local universities to harvest $$ from students in China without actually having them physically present on the island. It also presents a massive new market to textbook and educational software developers, and will enable them to use Taiwan universities as platforms to launch software into the China market. A China-focused innovation?

The ministry plans to announce the list of qualified schools this September.

According to the MOE, the online courses will include humanities, art, business management, electrical engineering and computer science, while special courses will be provided for elementary and junior high school teachers to advanced their studies.

The ministry emphasized that to ensure high quality, the programs would be implemented under the principle of "active openness, effective management."

The Computer Center of the MOE stressed that all online courses and plans for online degree programs have to be examined to ensure the quality of the program implementation.

In addition, the MOE decided to loosen restrictions stipulating that total online credits recognized must be less than one-third of the minimum credits required for graduation from vocational schools, junior colleges, colleges and universities.

The ministry indicated that at present, over 60 schools conduct e-learning courses and nearly 40,000 students are taking online courses, adding that the figures proved that there is a tendency toward digital learning.

[Taiwan]

Welcome Aboard Patrick!

My friend Patrick Allard and fellow Taiwan expat opened a new blog this week, The Nebulon Fry. Have a look and leave a snarky comment or two.

My friend Joel Haas (www.joelhaasstudio.com or www.sculpturewalk.org) has pointed me to a hysterical parody blog of advice from G. Chauncer. Enjoy!

[Taiwan] [Taiwan Blogs]

Ma Opens with a Pack of Lies

The Ma Road Show continues, as Ma demonstrates he is going to lie his way through this visit, and no one is going to call him on it.

Ma's US trip comes amid tension over Taiwan's slow progress toward a major arms deal with the United States that has repeatedly been blocked by the KMT-controlled parliament.

"The policy on the part of the KMT is quite clear. We support reasonable purchase of arms from the United States. We need adequate defense capabilities," Ma said.

Taiwan's ruling party initially sought approval for a 19 billion dollar arms package to be purchased over 15 years, but has since scaled back the amount.

Ma blamed the delay of the deal, approved by the US side in 2001, on the ruling party, saying it had submitted the budget proposal only in 2004.

"Last year should be considered the first year for blocking the process. And actually the 55 times of blocking effectively cut the price tag from 18 billion to 10.2 billion, saving the people of Taiwan a lot of money," he said.

LOL. The DPP didn't submit the package until 2004 because the US didn't give them any cost numbers on it until 2002, and the Ministry of National Defense procurement process, which normally takes about 18 months, had to grind through. The man is a total liar. Is there no one in the audience who will call him on this?

And the logic here is absurd. Is Ma saying that they blocked it 50 times because the DPP was late? What a crock! And Reuters still loves this wrong comment:

China and Taiwan separated after a civil war in 1949, but Beijing still considers the island part of its territory and has threatened to retake the island by force if it moves towards independence.

China and Taiwan were never together. It was China and the KMT who separated in 1949. Can we get that one fixed too? I think the best part of it is this one:

If the KMT is able to come back to power in 2008, we certainly will resume the interrupted negotiations based on the '92 consensus, namely one China, different interpretations," Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou said.

Recently one of the KMT members involved in formulating the the "92 Consensus" admitted that it was a lie and there wasn't one. Ma says he will begin negotiations based on a consensus that doesn't exist. Sure.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Bush] [Chen Shui-bian] [Ma Ying-jeou] [Taiwan Independence] [Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)] [US Foreign Policy]

China Demands US Troops in Korea not be used in Sino-US Conflict

The International Herald Tribune reports:

The Chinese ambassador to South Korea warned Wednesday that a new defense agreement between Washington and Seoul should never be used to allow U.S. troops based in South Korea to intervene in a possible conflict between China and Taiwan.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Korea] [Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)] [US Foreign Policy]

Ma Ying-jeou's coronation swing through the US is in full bore, with the US media rolling over and wagging its tail for the future Presidential candidate, and the only people who have trouble with the ascendancy of a Hong Kong-born, non-Taiwanese, pro-China politician becoming the leader of Taiwan being US conservatives. US progressives have serious, serious problems on the Taiwan issue....

In any case the Nelson Report noted of the trip:

Informed observers make clear that Ma's treatment is first and foremost a very pointed message to Taiwan President Chen Shuibian, as the latest manifestation of President Bush's personal concerns over how best to maintain the status quo between China, Taiwan, and the US, following Chen's New Years Day speech, and the subsequent fight over the National Unification Council.

At the same time, of course, the Administration's top China handlers want their own sense of Ma personally, and as the presumptive KMT nominee...if not also the likely winner...if the DPP's current difficulties on Taiwan continue. Ma clearly sees this trip as a major opportunity to score points with the Administration, and to demonstrate to both China and the voters on Taiwan that he is the best man to successfully manage relations with the US.

Ma has a huge advantage over Chen -- he speaks English well and went to Harvard. In US eyes this outweighs being a former student spy and serving as English secretary to a dictator, and nurturing connections to local crime gangs, as well as being pro-China. Apparently, as long as you speak good English, you can do just about anything and get thunderous applause in the US.

Ma had some interesting proposals:

The centerpiece of Ma's presentation... is that, first, the KMT will work with the DPP government to complete action on what remains of the US arms sale package of 2001, but which has been cut back in the Legislative Yuan from $18-billion to a more modest $10-billion;

Second, a KMT government headed by Ma, after 2008, will seek a 30 to 50 year interim peace agreement with China which will preserve the peaceful statusquo in the Taiwan Strait, while giving China time to develop toward a capitalist democracy...but which would not work toward either formal legal unification with China, nor formal legal independence;

Third, reinforcing this process, once underway, would be re- establishing direct transportation links, tourism, vastly enhanced educational exchanges, etc., along with the already burgeoning direct investment and Taiwan business human migration to the PRC, which he estimated currently at 1-million and growing.

Before the reader gets too excited about a 50 year peace agreement -- with the Chinese, how much will that be worth anyway? -- conservatives in the audience realized instantly what this really meant -- Ma was proposing bring Taiwan into China's orbit, and taking it out of the US orbit. As the writer of the Nelson Report pointed out (this time was far more balanced than the reporting on the NUC, which was frankly anti-Chen), Ma's responses were evasive on the key point of US-Taiwan defense cooperation, and further, Ma operates from the KMT 'catechism' of One China and thus, believes that "agreeing to disagree" means finding a way to bring Taiwan into the Chinese fold. I'm glad someone reporting on the Hill has grasped this salient fact.

As those of us who have been watching Ma mature from KMT Golden Haired Boy to International Power Broker understand, Ma Ying-jeou is ultimately a product of his background, and that background is essentially a Theology of Return that embraces China, not Taiwan, as its focus. Ma thinks of himself as a Chinese, not a Taiwanese, and thus his dealings with the US will always be from that perspective. Ma's whole career is more or less a search for power under that rubric, and a striving for a way to annex Taiwan to China over the objections of the Taiwanese. The 50 Year Security Treaty is one way of accomplishing this. I've been saying for years now that the DPP is a US opportunity, not a US problem. Perhaps Ma Ying-jeou will finally be able to convince the US of this.

Pursuant to this point, another thing I think Ma's trip will bring out is that the differences between the KMT and the US government are actually greater than everyone thinks. The long and the short of it is that US security policy, and long-term hegemony in Asia, is not compatible with a KMT president in Taiwan. This is because the KMT is cooperating with Beijing -- now that Taiwan is a democracy, the KMT has become a pro-China party. If the implications of this have not sunk in, they had best begin to, and soon. US support of the DPP is, at the moment, not only the ethically correct choice, but the right response to China as well.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Bush] [Chen Shui-bian] [Ma Ying-jeou] [Taiwan Independence] [Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)] [US Foreign Policy]

Taiwan in the Early Years B&W photos

This link take you to the list of files. Should be accessible from there. TEASER: Look for the stripper!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TaiwanFocus/files/

World Net Daily: Taiwan Part of US

Richard Hartzell, who has long battled on behalf of foreigners here in Taiwan, has also been arguing for the last few years that Taiwan is actually a territory of the US. The argument is not accepted by anyone internationally, but it is a rational argument and worth exploring. Today Michael (New Hampshire Bushman) clued me in that Hartzell has published it in World Net Daily.

Let's look at Taiwan. All military attacks against Taiwan during the World War II period were conducted by the United States, so the U.S. is the "conqueror." The surrender of the Japanese military forces in Formosa was on Oct. 25, 1945, thus beginning the military occupation, and the administrative authority for this military occupation was delegated to Chiang Kai-shek (aka the Chinese nationalists or Republic of China). The treaty between the U.S. and Japan came into effect on April 28, 1952. Japan renounced the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan, but no receiving country was named. The Republic of China flag should have come down at this point.

So, who has legal jurisdiction over Taiwan? Article 23 of the peace treaty confirmed that the United States was the principal occupying power, and Article 4b gave the USMG full authority to make final disposition of "Formosa and the Pescadores." So, does the military government of the principal occupying power end with the coming into effect of the peace treaty? For a territorial cession, the answer is no.

Last year Poagao remarked that Hartzell was going incite a war, because if China ever began to think that the US thought it owned Taiwan, it would respond with alacrity. Perhaps. But the validity of this argument should be thrashed out in public, not neglected. It is a shame that it has to appear in the kooky right-wing paper World Net Daily, though.

Hartzell has a website with a deeper exploration of the topic.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [US Foreign Policy] [Asia] [Taiwan Independence] [Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)]

Textbooks in Taiwan

Several weeks ago Jon Benda from Notes of a former native speaker stopped by to ask about my Research Methods and Writing Course.

I often ask my students (in the Applied Foreign Languages Department) whether they would like to use Chinese textbooks in their courses. Some answer yes, but by and large the answer is no, they would not.

Two reasons are generally given. First, they say that they have come to the university to learn English, and thus, they should be studying in that language. Second comes the blunt reason: Chinese-language textbooks suck.

One book doth not a paradigm make, but my Research Methods text, Research Method (with the fine disregard for the plural form that so many translations done locally have, published by Tsang Hai Book Publishing), a Chinese-language textbook, is no violation of that claim. The Chinese itself is not difficult for me, but the students say that they have trouble understanding what it is saying, probably because the book asks them to think about the world in a completely new way. Although they insist that the Chinese itself is difficult. Probably my Chinese is not good enough to spot that -- it all seems difficult to me!

More importantly, though, the textbook is very poorly put together. Explanations are all in the abstract. The writer will present a definition, but the discussion consists entirely of further refinements of that abstraction. No examples are ever given. Diagrams are generally completely abstract. There are no boxes that break out controversies in the field or that further discuss textbook content. The layout is simpleminded, in four colors, devoid of interesting or insightful graphics.

This preference for abstraction is one that I have seen in many different contexts in local communication. Yesterday I had the misfortunate to attend a talk on EQ given at our university by a local academic. The talk was on child-rearing, given by an older male in his 50s who had no children of his own. Hopeless from the beginning, it quickly descended into a morass of cultural stereotyping void of real insight. It also contained plenty of abstract advice -- "Don't be a perfectionist" -- but no concrete ways to achieve that end. I am not sure why there is such a strong preference for the abstract here.

One explanation often heard for the poor quality of local textbooks is that they are done by committee -- the "author" has his graduate students prepare work on different topics, then puts the material together to make the textbook and publishes under his own name.

BTW, if you as a university teacher are tempted to use a Chinese version of a book with an English version for yourself, my advice is not to. I have found that the Chinese versions, farmed out by the chapter to different translators, sometimes leave out material, change the order of charts and tables so that the text no longer relates, and sometimes even restructure chapters and subheadings. This makes even the simple request to "turn to page 118 and look at Table 19" an adventure in cross-cultural miscommunication. My advice is to use one language, to ensure that everyone is on the same page.

[Taiwan]

April 1, Swenson's Meet Up

Jerome Keating notifies the world:

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

I am sending the announcement of our monthly meeting on April 1st, 9:30 am at Swensen's early; same place as the last two meetings. I will resend a reminder next week, but this week I wanted all to be able to plan ahead a little since I am adding an element.

[ADDRESS 9:30 am at the same place as last month; Swensen's #81 Keelung Rd. Sec. 2, Taipei.]

At each monthly meeting I hope to have different members speak briefly (15 minutes or so) on something of note to the group. For April, I have asked Jeff Martin to give a summary of his research and findings for his recent doctoral dissertation at the University of Chicago in Political Science/Sociology???.

The Title of the dissertation is "Keeping the Peace in a Changing Regime: Police Work in Taiwan"

Jeff has done extensive studies on the Police Force in Taiwan including how they cooperate with the police in the People's Republic of China in common goals against crime; plus how they defined their role as Taiwan changed from martial law and a one party state to a democracy.

We will have our regular open free-wheeling discussions over breakfast and then give Jeff 15 minutes to hit the key points; afterwards the floor will be open to questions etc.

Besides the synergy we get from sharing with each other I think this will give something extra to our get togethers.

Jerome

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

[Taiwan]

Resource: Old Black White Photos of Taiwan

B&W photos from the bad old days. Don't miss the stripper in the music van! Explanations in Chinese.

Early.Taiwan.pps


[Taiwan] [photography]