Much to the relief of the US, China and of course the majority of Taiwanese who voted for him, Ma Ying-jeou was re-elected as president for another four years. His re-election means no disruption in the building of cross straits relations and corresponding reduced likelihood of flare-ups and incidents that would raise cross strait tensions. Stability across the straits was highly sought after by Washington, Beijing as well as Taipei.
Ma won by a 6% margin, less than the 17% landslide from his first election but nonetheless a surprisingly comfortable lead considering the widely anticipated wire photo finish with his opponent from the opposition party. There were no last minute shenanigan, such as an election eve assassination attempt, to interrupt the proceedings. Some observers have even gone to proclaim that Taiwan's orderly exercise in democracy should inspire their brethren on the mainland.
Actually, I think Taiwan could serve as a lesson for America. Essentially three out of four voters in Taiwan turned out to vote. In the US, one out of two would be doing good. Nearly 200,000 Taiwanese flew back from the mainland, where they were working to vote in the election. Uncounted thousands even flew from the San Francisco Bay Area to vote. Since Ma won by more than 800,000 votes, the oversea returnees can't be said to spell the difference.
But we can say, they went back to Taiwan to vote because they cared. We have not seen such voter concern and passion in the US for many elections. Just the opposite is happening. We are inundated with negative lies and deliberate distortions funded by the rich to the point that we no longer give a damn. For decades America has not been a democracy of the people but has become corrupted by highest bidders.
Showing posts with label Taiwan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Taiwan. Show all posts
Monday, January 16, 2012
Monday, November 14, 2011
As agent for change, Obama is a disappointment
President Obama ran on the promise that he represents the agent for change and as president he would do things differently. So far he has delivered mostly more of same.
Banks that were too big to fail under the previous adminstration continues to be too big to fail.
Wars too costly to fight has lingered and America continues to bleed.
Most recently, Obama has joined the chorus that blamed the US economic woes on an undervalued Renminbi, as if a sudden valuation would solve his problems at home. Fact of the matter is that the US has been printing greenbacks faster than China could keep up with, even if they wanted to.
Last week a column written by a former military person in NYT proposed that Obama approach China with the offer to swap American disengagement of Taiwan for the American debt China is holding. The logic behind this piece is that if the US leaves the room, then the two parties across the Taiwan Strait would natually sit down and negotiate a peaceful settlement.
This is certainly a bold and provocative idea that stands no chance of getting Obama's attention. He has to date shown no inclination to make any bold and thus potentially risky moves.
Banks that were too big to fail under the previous adminstration continues to be too big to fail.
Wars too costly to fight has lingered and America continues to bleed.
Most recently, Obama has joined the chorus that blamed the US economic woes on an undervalued Renminbi, as if a sudden valuation would solve his problems at home. Fact of the matter is that the US has been printing greenbacks faster than China could keep up with, even if they wanted to.
Last week a column written by a former military person in NYT proposed that Obama approach China with the offer to swap American disengagement of Taiwan for the American debt China is holding. The logic behind this piece is that if the US leaves the room, then the two parties across the Taiwan Strait would natually sit down and negotiate a peaceful settlement.
This is certainly a bold and provocative idea that stands no chance of getting Obama's attention. He has to date shown no inclination to make any bold and thus potentially risky moves.
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Like Father, Like Son--Taiwan's Long Running Saga of Shame
Chen Shui-bian, Taiwan's first freely elected president that served two full terms, freely helped himself to any under the table gold he can grab and is now in jail serving time for his many convictions.
Throughout Chen's ordeal leading up to his final court appearance and sentencing, he fought his case publicly. Rather than covering his face from public view, he relished every public exposure into attempts to turn the proceedings against him into a farce.
He even boasted that all the tainted funds he was alleged to have in Swiss bank accounts would magically reappear in Taiwan within days of his release from detention. No shame, no slinking away for this man.
It appears that Chen Chih-chung is taking a page from his father's book. Chen junior the son has been convicted of perjury and sentenced to three months in jail. He fought the conviction all the way to Taiwan's Supreme Court and lost.
Chen Jr. promptly went public and unabashedly proclaimed that his sentence was politically motivated. He thought the Supreme Court of Taiwan should have cut him a deal where he could perform public service and pay a fine in lieu of going to jail.
According to Taiwan's law, a felon cannot hold a government post and Chen Jr. was stripped of his seat on the Kaohsiung City Council. Chen Jr. protested that said law was full of loopholes--no doubt he knows them all--and he should have received some sort of exemption.
The people of Taiwan are probably relieved to know that Chen Jr. will not run for the legislature upon his release from jail. This family does not know impropriety from their personal holes in the ground and is constant reminder of disgrace to the embarrassed people of Taiwan.
Throughout Chen's ordeal leading up to his final court appearance and sentencing, he fought his case publicly. Rather than covering his face from public view, he relished every public exposure into attempts to turn the proceedings against him into a farce.
He even boasted that all the tainted funds he was alleged to have in Swiss bank accounts would magically reappear in Taiwan within days of his release from detention. No shame, no slinking away for this man.
It appears that Chen Chih-chung is taking a page from his father's book. Chen junior the son has been convicted of perjury and sentenced to three months in jail. He fought the conviction all the way to Taiwan's Supreme Court and lost.
Chen Jr. promptly went public and unabashedly proclaimed that his sentence was politically motivated. He thought the Supreme Court of Taiwan should have cut him a deal where he could perform public service and pay a fine in lieu of going to jail.
According to Taiwan's law, a felon cannot hold a government post and Chen Jr. was stripped of his seat on the Kaohsiung City Council. Chen Jr. protested that said law was full of loopholes--no doubt he knows them all--and he should have received some sort of exemption.
The people of Taiwan are probably relieved to know that Chen Jr. will not run for the legislature upon his release from jail. This family does not know impropriety from their personal holes in the ground and is constant reminder of disgrace to the embarrassed people of Taiwan.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Ma Ying-jeou Says “Nihao Dalu”
Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou celebrated the Year of the Rabbit by instructing all government officials to henceforth stop referring the other side of the straits as “China.” He reasoned that to call the other side China was to imply that Taiwan was not part of China, in violation of the 1992 One-China Consensus subscribed by both sides.
Instead, Ma suggested duian (对岸) meaning the shore across the way or dalu (大陆) meaning the mainland when referring to the big neighbor across the straits—akin to the US continent as the mainland to the Hawaiians.
Ma was elected president in 2008 on the pledge of closer economic cooperation with the mainland and reversing his independent minded predecessor’s tension filled approach of “one China and one Taiwan.”
Ma’s popularity initially tumbled as his economic policy did not bring about the immediate miraculous economic recovery that the impatient people of Taiwan expected. Instead Taiwan in 2009 was as much a victim of the global financial meltdown as most other countries.
However, Ma upon taking office began cross strait talks in earnest culminating in the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement. Even as details of ECFA were being hammered out, direct flights began and economic cooperation flourished.
The payoff became evident in 2010 when Taiwan’s economy grew by nearly 11%, strongest gain since 1986. Export increased by nearly 35%, over two-fifths of which headed to the mainland. Private sector investments in Taiwan increased by nearly one third, an unprecedented show of confidence in Taiwan not seen for more than 40 years.
Tourism from the mainland to Taiwan, not possible under Chen Shui-bian, Ma’s predecessor, has grown to over 100,000 visitors per month and contributed $3 billion to Taiwan’s economy since Ma opened Taiwan to mainland tourists. In less than two years, mainland Chinese visitors have already become the largest source of tourists visiting Taiwan. In addition to tour groups, Ma’s administration is now exploring a way to allow individual tourists in order to tap into even greater tourism spending from across the straits.
By proclaiming appropriate cross-strait terminology, Ma is betting his political future on the presumption that closer economic cooperation with the mainland will continue to pay off. There are plenty of indications that this will be a safe bet.
Despite the fast growing rate of inbound tourists to Taiwan, the frequency of person visits from Taiwan to the mainland, for business and tourism, is still 4-5 times greater than in the other direction. China sends 57.4 million tourists out of China last year and is expected to overtake the US as the largest source of outbound tourists by 2015. Right now Taiwan is only attracting 2 out of every 100 tourists from the mainland and thus has plenty of upside yet to be realized.
Taiwan companies have invested well over $100 billion on the mainland. Mainland companies have only been recently allowed by the Taipei government to invest in Taiwan. This is timely because only in recent 3-4 years are Chinese companies encouraged by Beijing to make outbound investments. The amount invested in Taiwan to date, around $137 million is not even one percent of total outbound investments. The potential of direct investment from the mainland into Taiwan is huge and can only further stimulate Taiwan’s economy.
Ironically when China first opened to the west after 1972, foreign visitors were admonished not to use the term dalu or mainland but China or People Republic of China in order not to suggest separateness between Taiwan and the mainland. Now the use of the term seems to suggest closer cooperation between the two sides.
No one seems to care as to how long the two sides will remain separate or if they will actually reunite. In the meantime, Ma is betting that continued economic improvements in Taiwan will win the peoples’ confidence in him, enough to ensure his reelection.
A version of this piece appeared in the New America Media.
Instead, Ma suggested duian (对岸) meaning the shore across the way or dalu (大陆) meaning the mainland when referring to the big neighbor across the straits—akin to the US continent as the mainland to the Hawaiians.
Ma was elected president in 2008 on the pledge of closer economic cooperation with the mainland and reversing his independent minded predecessor’s tension filled approach of “one China and one Taiwan.”
Ma’s popularity initially tumbled as his economic policy did not bring about the immediate miraculous economic recovery that the impatient people of Taiwan expected. Instead Taiwan in 2009 was as much a victim of the global financial meltdown as most other countries.
However, Ma upon taking office began cross strait talks in earnest culminating in the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement. Even as details of ECFA were being hammered out, direct flights began and economic cooperation flourished.
The payoff became evident in 2010 when Taiwan’s economy grew by nearly 11%, strongest gain since 1986. Export increased by nearly 35%, over two-fifths of which headed to the mainland. Private sector investments in Taiwan increased by nearly one third, an unprecedented show of confidence in Taiwan not seen for more than 40 years.
Tourism from the mainland to Taiwan, not possible under Chen Shui-bian, Ma’s predecessor, has grown to over 100,000 visitors per month and contributed $3 billion to Taiwan’s economy since Ma opened Taiwan to mainland tourists. In less than two years, mainland Chinese visitors have already become the largest source of tourists visiting Taiwan. In addition to tour groups, Ma’s administration is now exploring a way to allow individual tourists in order to tap into even greater tourism spending from across the straits.
By proclaiming appropriate cross-strait terminology, Ma is betting his political future on the presumption that closer economic cooperation with the mainland will continue to pay off. There are plenty of indications that this will be a safe bet.
Despite the fast growing rate of inbound tourists to Taiwan, the frequency of person visits from Taiwan to the mainland, for business and tourism, is still 4-5 times greater than in the other direction. China sends 57.4 million tourists out of China last year and is expected to overtake the US as the largest source of outbound tourists by 2015. Right now Taiwan is only attracting 2 out of every 100 tourists from the mainland and thus has plenty of upside yet to be realized.
Taiwan companies have invested well over $100 billion on the mainland. Mainland companies have only been recently allowed by the Taipei government to invest in Taiwan. This is timely because only in recent 3-4 years are Chinese companies encouraged by Beijing to make outbound investments. The amount invested in Taiwan to date, around $137 million is not even one percent of total outbound investments. The potential of direct investment from the mainland into Taiwan is huge and can only further stimulate Taiwan’s economy.
Ironically when China first opened to the west after 1972, foreign visitors were admonished not to use the term dalu or mainland but China or People Republic of China in order not to suggest separateness between Taiwan and the mainland. Now the use of the term seems to suggest closer cooperation between the two sides.
No one seems to care as to how long the two sides will remain separate or if they will actually reunite. In the meantime, Ma is betting that continued economic improvements in Taiwan will win the peoples’ confidence in him, enough to ensure his reelection.
A version of this piece appeared in the New America Media.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Building Mutual Trust between US and China has a long way to go
China’s President Hu Jintao has concluded his state visit and returned to Beijing. By most accounts, his visit was considered a virtually unqualified success—for him and for his host, President Barrack Obama—in a rare win-win in the bilateral relations.
The mainstream media considered the visit a win for Obama and his team for successfully presenting all their concerns to Hu: Secretary of State Clinton on North Korea, Treasury Secretary Geithner on the value of the RMB and Commerce Secretary Locke on protection of intellectual property and level procurement policy inside China. Obama in his joint press conference with Hu mentioned his concern on human rights. All the potentially confrontational issues were delivered diplomatically and in easy to digest doses.
Hu’s visit to Congress the day after the state dinner was the most problematic, but the Congressional leaders despite threatening to confront the leader of China had their meetings with Hu behind closed doors. Afterwards they could claim before the press to have raised their concerns with Hu and expressed satisfaction with the outcome.
Hu also won because he got the high profile treatment and honor accorded to him as the head of a major nation and there were no unpleasant surprises or glitches, except for a minor one when everyone expected simultaneous translation at the joint conference and there were none.
The usual China bashing howlers and screechers were kept on the fringe and did not steal the limelight as they might have wished. The confusion at the White House press conference did present Russ Limbaugh the opportunity to make a complete ass of himself on national radio. He broke out with a 20 second verbal burst that sounded like a savage recently descended from the trees. Limbaugh’s infantile braying alleged to imitate Hu’s remarks offended many and did nothing but tarnished his own image.
So is this a new beginning for the US China bilateral relations? I don’t think so. Some fundamental differences between the two sides have not been resolved and until they are, it will be pretty much business as before. The $45 billion of potential export business that Hu’s advance team brought to the US certainly made the whole visit go down more smoothly but does not represent a permanent cure.
How to deal with Taiwan represents by far the most challenging issue facing both sides. In Obama’s remarks at the press conference, he referred to the Taiwan Relations Act, but in the joint statement about the US commitment to one China policy, there were no reference to TRA. Thus, China could claim to have made progress on this issue while the US can claim that nothing has affected the status quo. In fact, until the US renounces selling arms to Taiwan and stops referring to TRA as though it were an international treaty—in fact it was only a Congressional act—progress in the bilateral relations will be sluggish.
The differences are not just on substantive issues but also on style. Both sides need to devote more effort to understand how as well as what messages are being conveyed by the other side.
For example, the media made a fuss about Hu’s public admission that China has more work to be done to improve human rights. In fact, there was nothing remarkable about Hu’s admission. Most officials inside China from local to national level will freely admit that there are plenty to improve about human rights in China.
The media however did not pick up that Hu also said, “The two sides should respect each other’s value systems, beliefs and development models.” In other words, Hu was saying we know we have a human rights problem—so do you America—and we will deal with our problem our way and not according to your standards.
Hu’s speeches were full of references of China looking to be a cooperative partner with the US. He meant a partner in the full sense of the word and not a subordinated party to the US as the big brother. He was looking for mutual respect as well as mutual benefit. Obama’s team of officials seemed to have accorded that sense of mutual respect on this visit.
How Obama was regarded and treated following his visit to Beijing in November 2009 has also been subject to erroneous interpretations by the mainstream media. Because westerner's perspective was based on win-lose confrontation, they thought Obama was too soft and concessionary throughout his visit and did not win China’s respect. They credit the success of this visit to Obama being harder and more assertive. I disagree.
I believe while in Beijing, Obama positively impressed Beijing that he was an American president that China could work with as a collaborative partner. Shortly after his return, however, he announced arms sales to Taiwan which shocked Beijing and they felt betrayed. Obama was oblivious to how Beijing might react. He felt that the US had always sold arms to Taiwan and nothing has changed. China thought that if Obama had considered China a collaborative partner, then he would have taken China’s feelings into consideration and not made a unilateral announcement on a matter most sensitive to Beijing.
This incident did the most damage to the budding feeling of mutual trust that Obama had built while in Beijing. He could have avoided the set back, I believe, if while in Beijing he had privately confided to Hu that because of politics, he would have to sell some arms to Taiwan upon his return and not catch Beijing by surprise.
Mutual trust, much deeper than it exists today, will be required if the US truly wants China’s help in resolving the North Korea crisis, one of the most nettlesome foreign policy issues facing the US. As recent wiki leaks revealed, some Chinese officials have expressed the view that letting the North Korean regime collapse would save Beijing a lot of grief. China has good relations with South Korea and certainly can work with that government as a neighbor once the Korean peninsula is unified.
However, China could not possibly entertain the thought of having American troops stationed on the border of a unified Korea and China. For China to seriously contemplate letting North Korea implode, the US need to assure China that the US would not take advantage of such a collapse and put troops in the north. We would be looking at a lot of mutual trust that does not exist now.
In the past, the US practice of strategic ambiguity meant making conflicting statements and taking inconsistent positions to keep China guessing. Obviously, this did not build trust and did not alter China’s perception of US as unreliable.
To build mutual trust, both sides need to modify their style of communication as well revising their priorities offering selected concessions. The Americans need to improve their ability to receive and digest nuanced signals from China. The Chinese need to be able to communicate in a more direct and straightforward manner so as not be misunderstood.
The day when both parties can feel that there is mutual rapport is when Secretary Gates could say to President Hu upon landing in Beijing, “Gosh, Mr. President I see that I am way off on China’s stealth plane development schedule. If China has been as transparent as I had suggested in the past, I wouldn’t be so embarrassed,” followed by a jocular chuckle shared between friends.
An edited version appeared in New America Media.
The mainstream media considered the visit a win for Obama and his team for successfully presenting all their concerns to Hu: Secretary of State Clinton on North Korea, Treasury Secretary Geithner on the value of the RMB and Commerce Secretary Locke on protection of intellectual property and level procurement policy inside China. Obama in his joint press conference with Hu mentioned his concern on human rights. All the potentially confrontational issues were delivered diplomatically and in easy to digest doses.
Hu’s visit to Congress the day after the state dinner was the most problematic, but the Congressional leaders despite threatening to confront the leader of China had their meetings with Hu behind closed doors. Afterwards they could claim before the press to have raised their concerns with Hu and expressed satisfaction with the outcome.
Hu also won because he got the high profile treatment and honor accorded to him as the head of a major nation and there were no unpleasant surprises or glitches, except for a minor one when everyone expected simultaneous translation at the joint conference and there were none.
The usual China bashing howlers and screechers were kept on the fringe and did not steal the limelight as they might have wished. The confusion at the White House press conference did present Russ Limbaugh the opportunity to make a complete ass of himself on national radio. He broke out with a 20 second verbal burst that sounded like a savage recently descended from the trees. Limbaugh’s infantile braying alleged to imitate Hu’s remarks offended many and did nothing but tarnished his own image.
So is this a new beginning for the US China bilateral relations? I don’t think so. Some fundamental differences between the two sides have not been resolved and until they are, it will be pretty much business as before. The $45 billion of potential export business that Hu’s advance team brought to the US certainly made the whole visit go down more smoothly but does not represent a permanent cure.
How to deal with Taiwan represents by far the most challenging issue facing both sides. In Obama’s remarks at the press conference, he referred to the Taiwan Relations Act, but in the joint statement about the US commitment to one China policy, there were no reference to TRA. Thus, China could claim to have made progress on this issue while the US can claim that nothing has affected the status quo. In fact, until the US renounces selling arms to Taiwan and stops referring to TRA as though it were an international treaty—in fact it was only a Congressional act—progress in the bilateral relations will be sluggish.
The differences are not just on substantive issues but also on style. Both sides need to devote more effort to understand how as well as what messages are being conveyed by the other side.
For example, the media made a fuss about Hu’s public admission that China has more work to be done to improve human rights. In fact, there was nothing remarkable about Hu’s admission. Most officials inside China from local to national level will freely admit that there are plenty to improve about human rights in China.
The media however did not pick up that Hu also said, “The two sides should respect each other’s value systems, beliefs and development models.” In other words, Hu was saying we know we have a human rights problem—so do you America—and we will deal with our problem our way and not according to your standards.
Hu’s speeches were full of references of China looking to be a cooperative partner with the US. He meant a partner in the full sense of the word and not a subordinated party to the US as the big brother. He was looking for mutual respect as well as mutual benefit. Obama’s team of officials seemed to have accorded that sense of mutual respect on this visit.
How Obama was regarded and treated following his visit to Beijing in November 2009 has also been subject to erroneous interpretations by the mainstream media. Because westerner's perspective was based on win-lose confrontation, they thought Obama was too soft and concessionary throughout his visit and did not win China’s respect. They credit the success of this visit to Obama being harder and more assertive. I disagree.
I believe while in Beijing, Obama positively impressed Beijing that he was an American president that China could work with as a collaborative partner. Shortly after his return, however, he announced arms sales to Taiwan which shocked Beijing and they felt betrayed. Obama was oblivious to how Beijing might react. He felt that the US had always sold arms to Taiwan and nothing has changed. China thought that if Obama had considered China a collaborative partner, then he would have taken China’s feelings into consideration and not made a unilateral announcement on a matter most sensitive to Beijing.
This incident did the most damage to the budding feeling of mutual trust that Obama had built while in Beijing. He could have avoided the set back, I believe, if while in Beijing he had privately confided to Hu that because of politics, he would have to sell some arms to Taiwan upon his return and not catch Beijing by surprise.
Mutual trust, much deeper than it exists today, will be required if the US truly wants China’s help in resolving the North Korea crisis, one of the most nettlesome foreign policy issues facing the US. As recent wiki leaks revealed, some Chinese officials have expressed the view that letting the North Korean regime collapse would save Beijing a lot of grief. China has good relations with South Korea and certainly can work with that government as a neighbor once the Korean peninsula is unified.
However, China could not possibly entertain the thought of having American troops stationed on the border of a unified Korea and China. For China to seriously contemplate letting North Korea implode, the US need to assure China that the US would not take advantage of such a collapse and put troops in the north. We would be looking at a lot of mutual trust that does not exist now.
In the past, the US practice of strategic ambiguity meant making conflicting statements and taking inconsistent positions to keep China guessing. Obviously, this did not build trust and did not alter China’s perception of US as unreliable.
To build mutual trust, both sides need to modify their style of communication as well revising their priorities offering selected concessions. The Americans need to improve their ability to receive and digest nuanced signals from China. The Chinese need to be able to communicate in a more direct and straightforward manner so as not be misunderstood.
The day when both parties can feel that there is mutual rapport is when Secretary Gates could say to President Hu upon landing in Beijing, “Gosh, Mr. President I see that I am way off on China’s stealth plane development schedule. If China has been as transparent as I had suggested in the past, I wouldn’t be so embarrassed,” followed by a jocular chuckle shared between friends.
An edited version appeared in New America Media.
Friday, June 11, 2010
In Taiwan's Corruption Trial of the Ages, Money Talks
Taiwan's high court has ruled on former President Chen Shui-bian's conviction for money laundering, corruption, falsifying documents and accepting bribes. The high court's ruling did not overturn Chen's conviction from a lower court but lessened the penalty of his crimes. The most obvious was to reduce his life imprisonment to 20years in jail. Instead of being deprived of his citizen's rights for life, it is now only ten years.
There were no explanation given for the reduction of penalty which left open the speculation that perhaps Taiwan's judiciary is still hoping to recover the rest of the funds Chen and his family had illicitly absconded and put in overseas accounts.
Chen's family has been remitting funds from various overseas accounts in drips and drabs back to Taiwan apparently as part of the negotiating strategy with Taiwan's judiciary.
The strategy seems to be working. Chen said in court that he can guarantee the return of the remaining 570 million NT dollars held overseas within one week of his release on bail. Nothing subtle about Chen. To him, money has always talked louder than rule of law.
In the court room, Chen's supporters went through the motion of protesting loudly because Chen did not get exoneration but a mere term reduction, albeit with big smiles on their faces.
In Taiwan's peculiar brand of democracy, who knows how many more remittances it will take for Chen to become a free man? He apparently has two more layers of the courts where he can take his plea and by judiciously parcelling out the return of his ill gotten gains, he just might be able to buy his way out of jail.
I am hardly the only person to point out the inconsistency of the latest ruling. See for instance a translation of an editorial of one of Taiwan's major newspaper.
There were no explanation given for the reduction of penalty which left open the speculation that perhaps Taiwan's judiciary is still hoping to recover the rest of the funds Chen and his family had illicitly absconded and put in overseas accounts.
Chen's family has been remitting funds from various overseas accounts in drips and drabs back to Taiwan apparently as part of the negotiating strategy with Taiwan's judiciary.
The strategy seems to be working. Chen said in court that he can guarantee the return of the remaining 570 million NT dollars held overseas within one week of his release on bail. Nothing subtle about Chen. To him, money has always talked louder than rule of law.
In the court room, Chen's supporters went through the motion of protesting loudly because Chen did not get exoneration but a mere term reduction, albeit with big smiles on their faces.
In Taiwan's peculiar brand of democracy, who knows how many more remittances it will take for Chen to become a free man? He apparently has two more layers of the courts where he can take his plea and by judiciously parcelling out the return of his ill gotten gains, he just might be able to buy his way out of jail.
I am hardly the only person to point out the inconsistency of the latest ruling. See for instance a translation of an editorial of one of Taiwan's major newspaper.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
How long will the Strategic Triangle remain strategic? - Part II
I missed the second day of the Stanford symposium which was to concentrate on the future of Taiwan and the dynamics of the triangle. The following are my own observations on the matter.
The dramatic change in the cross strait relations since the change in the regime from Chen to Ma could not be overstated. Chen feared opening Taiwan to tourists from the mainland. Ma went after them. Now, thousands arrive from different points of the mainland daily providing multi-billion dollar boost to Taiwan’s economy. In the most recent negotiations for direct cross strait flights, it was the Taiwan side that wanted more flights and more destinations while the Beijing side was more reluctant.
Barely noted at the Stanford symposium was the remarkable change in Taiwan’s ranking in World Competitiveness Scoreboard as measured by the Lausanne based IMD. For the current 2010, Taiwan has risen to No. 8 in ranking from No. 23 in the previous year. No other economy has made such a dramatic leap in one year. This can only be attributed to the more enlightened policies under Ma, countermanding many of the policies in effect under Chen and the extent Taiwan has already integrated with the mainland.
The current expectation is that the parties across the strait will conclude the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) in June. ECFA was something eagerly sought by Ma’s administration as the most crucial development that will enable Taiwan to enter the global trade on more equal footing relative to other countries. The potential benefits to Taiwan’s economy would be enormous. Yet, the greatest opposition is being mounted by DPP because to them, the threat of integration with the mainland trumps any economic benefits.
Of course, DPP’s fear is not groundless. Beijing, under the leadership of Chairman Hu Jintao, finally understood that the way to winning the hearts and minds of the Taiwan people was not with missile intimidation but to encourage more people to people exchanges. Taiwan’s business people already understand the benefits of closer ties with the mainland, but they represent less than 10% of the populace.
Since Ma came into office, there have been direct flights, bi-directional cross strait tourism, and increasing visits from government and non-government officials in both directions. I believe Beijing is seeking every opportunity to tell the mainland side of the story directly to the people in Taiwan.
The previous regimes under Lee and Chen did not permit free exchange of people across the straits. They did not want direct contacts that could alter the perceptions of distrust that Lee and Chen had so carefully cultivated on the island of Taiwan. Lack of access and interchange certainly can explain why the high percentage of Taiwanese prefer the status quo.
I frankly believe integration across the straits is inevitable. Taiwan’s economic health is dependent on integration with the mainland. Economic cooperation will be accompanied by more people to people exchange. Increasing exchanges will build trust across the straits.
Taipei will also need to do its part. It will be up to Ma to explain to the people of Taiwan of the up-side benefits of closer cooperation with the mainland. Taiwan has suffered severe loss of confidence and sense of who they are after Chen’s eight years of misrule had isolated Taiwan from the world community. Ma needs to explain to the Taiwan people that rather than fear, they can be proud that they share the culture and history with the mainland.
The offer to negotiate ECFA was a surprise gesture of goodwill by Beijing. I believe the next surprise move will be when PLA redirect the aim of missiles away from Taiwan, a largely symbolic but psychologically important gesture to the people on Taiwan. Eventually, polls in Taiwan will swing away from independence and even status quo will look less attractive then the intriguing possibility of unification.
Given the speed that cross strait relations has warmed, I am confident that by 2015 Taiwan will drop from the ranks of the hotspots of tension while the world will still be dealing with the likes of the Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq, India-Pakistan-Kashmir triangle, and the two Koreas.
The dramatic change in the cross strait relations since the change in the regime from Chen to Ma could not be overstated. Chen feared opening Taiwan to tourists from the mainland. Ma went after them. Now, thousands arrive from different points of the mainland daily providing multi-billion dollar boost to Taiwan’s economy. In the most recent negotiations for direct cross strait flights, it was the Taiwan side that wanted more flights and more destinations while the Beijing side was more reluctant.
Barely noted at the Stanford symposium was the remarkable change in Taiwan’s ranking in World Competitiveness Scoreboard as measured by the Lausanne based IMD. For the current 2010, Taiwan has risen to No. 8 in ranking from No. 23 in the previous year. No other economy has made such a dramatic leap in one year. This can only be attributed to the more enlightened policies under Ma, countermanding many of the policies in effect under Chen and the extent Taiwan has already integrated with the mainland.
The current expectation is that the parties across the strait will conclude the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) in June. ECFA was something eagerly sought by Ma’s administration as the most crucial development that will enable Taiwan to enter the global trade on more equal footing relative to other countries. The potential benefits to Taiwan’s economy would be enormous. Yet, the greatest opposition is being mounted by DPP because to them, the threat of integration with the mainland trumps any economic benefits.
Of course, DPP’s fear is not groundless. Beijing, under the leadership of Chairman Hu Jintao, finally understood that the way to winning the hearts and minds of the Taiwan people was not with missile intimidation but to encourage more people to people exchanges. Taiwan’s business people already understand the benefits of closer ties with the mainland, but they represent less than 10% of the populace.
Since Ma came into office, there have been direct flights, bi-directional cross strait tourism, and increasing visits from government and non-government officials in both directions. I believe Beijing is seeking every opportunity to tell the mainland side of the story directly to the people in Taiwan.
The previous regimes under Lee and Chen did not permit free exchange of people across the straits. They did not want direct contacts that could alter the perceptions of distrust that Lee and Chen had so carefully cultivated on the island of Taiwan. Lack of access and interchange certainly can explain why the high percentage of Taiwanese prefer the status quo.
I frankly believe integration across the straits is inevitable. Taiwan’s economic health is dependent on integration with the mainland. Economic cooperation will be accompanied by more people to people exchange. Increasing exchanges will build trust across the straits.
Taipei will also need to do its part. It will be up to Ma to explain to the people of Taiwan of the up-side benefits of closer cooperation with the mainland. Taiwan has suffered severe loss of confidence and sense of who they are after Chen’s eight years of misrule had isolated Taiwan from the world community. Ma needs to explain to the Taiwan people that rather than fear, they can be proud that they share the culture and history with the mainland.
The offer to negotiate ECFA was a surprise gesture of goodwill by Beijing. I believe the next surprise move will be when PLA redirect the aim of missiles away from Taiwan, a largely symbolic but psychologically important gesture to the people on Taiwan. Eventually, polls in Taiwan will swing away from independence and even status quo will look less attractive then the intriguing possibility of unification.
Given the speed that cross strait relations has warmed, I am confident that by 2015 Taiwan will drop from the ranks of the hotspots of tension while the world will still be dealing with the likes of the Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq, India-Pakistan-Kashmir triangle, and the two Koreas.
Monday, May 31, 2010
How long will the Strategic Triangle remain strategic? - Part I
Stanford University recently held a symposium to discuss the future of the strategic triangle between the U.S., China and Taiwan. The symposium was led and chaired by Larry Diamond, Director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law.
The invited participants consisted of Americans who at one time or another had been in government service and held senior positions directly engaged in the bilateral relations with Taiwan but have now joined the academic ranks. A typical but by no means the only one would be Richard Bush who was the de facto ambassador to Taiwan at the time Chen Shuibian came to power.
Participants from Taiwan had mirror image backgrounds, i.e., having served in the Taiwan government and now in the academia, including Dr. Su Chi who just stepped down as Ma Yingjeou’s senior advisor on national security. Remarkably and without exception all the speakers from Taiwan received their advanced degrees in the United States.
No one came from mainland China to present possible PRC perspectives on the three bilateral relations of the triangle, although there were academicians, originally from the mainland now working in America, who spoke at the symposium.
In general the American presenters tended to focus on how Taiwan had been the tail that wagged the U.S. China bilateral relations, sometimes to the endless exasperation of the White House that had many more pressing global issues to deal with. However they seemed ready to forgive and dismiss past actions because Taiwan’s actions were that of a democracy and not some unilateral actions of petty dictators.
As a reflection of their former diplomatic and official positions, their comments on the roles of the then presidents of Taiwan, Lee Tenghui and Chen Shuibian, were politely muted and simply called them “unique” personalities and hoped that Taiwan will not see the likes of any more like them.
No one was tactless enough to point out that Lee’s peculiar behavior could be explained by his innate bias in favor of his Japanese roots and upbringing. Iwasato Masao, Lee’s name at birth, did not particularly want Taiwan to become independent so much as using that as an interim step to becoming part of Japan’s colony again. As he came to the end of his term of office, he adroitly engineered a split of the ruling KMT party that enabled Chen leader of the ostensibly opposition party to back into the presidency with less than 40% of the votes cast.
Chen, of course, kept everyone guessing as to his true colors during his first term of office when he declared “three no and one don’t have”—one of the no’s being no declaration of independence. It was during his second term that his pro independence stance became public knowledge and not incidentally his rampant corruption also became common knowledge.
The speakers from Taiwan were not as ready to declare Taiwan’s experiment with democracy an unqualified success but quite modestly claimed that theirs is an immature democracy going through some growing pains. However, even they did not mention one of the on-going developments that baffle any observers of Taiwan politics, namely the machinations of Chen in trying to get out of jail.
Having already been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment on the first series of charges, he has continued to demand to be released on bail so that he can defend himself against a second series of charges. Presumably, a third series of charges would be his get out of jail card if he were to be convicted on the current charges. This could be endless depending only on his skill in gaming Taiwan’s legal system.
After months of wrangling, his family has returned one million dollars of the twenty one ill-gotten millions stashed away in Switzerland into a pre-agreed designated government account. His son has hinted that at least 70% more of the accumulated payola would be forthcoming as soon as Chen is released from jail.
Needless to say, resorting to this kind of negotiations between a convicted felon and the government via the public media would be unheard of in any matured democracy.
Unlike the American contingent, the participants from Taiwan weren’t all political scientists but included an economist and a sociologist. The economist pointed out that from 1952 to 1987, Taiwan enjoyed the kind of economic boom that the mainland has seen in the last thirty years, namely annual average economic growth of 8.9%.
Under the KMT administration from 1993 to 1999, Taiwan continued to grow at the rate of 5.9% per annum and was the second best among the 8 major Asian economies. From 2001 to 2007 under Chen and his DPP party Taiwan’s economic growth rate fell to 4.2% per annum and came in last among the 8 Asian economies.
The legacy of Chen’s dismal performance on the economic front along with his blatantly corrupt practices has led to a disenchanted populace that greatly distrusts the government. According to recent polls taken in Taiwan by the economist, after two years under Ma Yingjeou, the people of Taiwan have more confidence in the KMT than DPP in being able to get along with Beijing. By better than 3 to 2, people of Taiwan believed KMT can better protect Taiwan’s interest with Beijing than can the DPP.
The sociologist from Taiwan then reported that integration between Taiwan and the mainland has proceeded to a degree far more extensively than has been generally understood. In the mid 1980’s the “unplanned” migration of Taiwanese businesses to the mainland may have been economically driven, but because of their socio-cultural affinity with the mainland, they have thrived. There are now more than one million Taiwanese business people in just the greater Shanghai area.
Another sign of integration not widely reported, he said, Taiwanese fishing boats off the Somalia coast have been routinely asking the PLA navy for escort service.
The second day of the symposium was to deal with the future of Taiwan and the dynamics of the triangle. Since I had to miss the second day, I felt unburdened by what was said to make my own observations in Part II of this blog.
The invited participants consisted of Americans who at one time or another had been in government service and held senior positions directly engaged in the bilateral relations with Taiwan but have now joined the academic ranks. A typical but by no means the only one would be Richard Bush who was the de facto ambassador to Taiwan at the time Chen Shuibian came to power.
Participants from Taiwan had mirror image backgrounds, i.e., having served in the Taiwan government and now in the academia, including Dr. Su Chi who just stepped down as Ma Yingjeou’s senior advisor on national security. Remarkably and without exception all the speakers from Taiwan received their advanced degrees in the United States.
No one came from mainland China to present possible PRC perspectives on the three bilateral relations of the triangle, although there were academicians, originally from the mainland now working in America, who spoke at the symposium.
In general the American presenters tended to focus on how Taiwan had been the tail that wagged the U.S. China bilateral relations, sometimes to the endless exasperation of the White House that had many more pressing global issues to deal with. However they seemed ready to forgive and dismiss past actions because Taiwan’s actions were that of a democracy and not some unilateral actions of petty dictators.
As a reflection of their former diplomatic and official positions, their comments on the roles of the then presidents of Taiwan, Lee Tenghui and Chen Shuibian, were politely muted and simply called them “unique” personalities and hoped that Taiwan will not see the likes of any more like them.
No one was tactless enough to point out that Lee’s peculiar behavior could be explained by his innate bias in favor of his Japanese roots and upbringing. Iwasato Masao, Lee’s name at birth, did not particularly want Taiwan to become independent so much as using that as an interim step to becoming part of Japan’s colony again. As he came to the end of his term of office, he adroitly engineered a split of the ruling KMT party that enabled Chen leader of the ostensibly opposition party to back into the presidency with less than 40% of the votes cast.
Chen, of course, kept everyone guessing as to his true colors during his first term of office when he declared “three no and one don’t have”—one of the no’s being no declaration of independence. It was during his second term that his pro independence stance became public knowledge and not incidentally his rampant corruption also became common knowledge.
The speakers from Taiwan were not as ready to declare Taiwan’s experiment with democracy an unqualified success but quite modestly claimed that theirs is an immature democracy going through some growing pains. However, even they did not mention one of the on-going developments that baffle any observers of Taiwan politics, namely the machinations of Chen in trying to get out of jail.
Having already been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment on the first series of charges, he has continued to demand to be released on bail so that he can defend himself against a second series of charges. Presumably, a third series of charges would be his get out of jail card if he were to be convicted on the current charges. This could be endless depending only on his skill in gaming Taiwan’s legal system.
After months of wrangling, his family has returned one million dollars of the twenty one ill-gotten millions stashed away in Switzerland into a pre-agreed designated government account. His son has hinted that at least 70% more of the accumulated payola would be forthcoming as soon as Chen is released from jail.
Needless to say, resorting to this kind of negotiations between a convicted felon and the government via the public media would be unheard of in any matured democracy.
Unlike the American contingent, the participants from Taiwan weren’t all political scientists but included an economist and a sociologist. The economist pointed out that from 1952 to 1987, Taiwan enjoyed the kind of economic boom that the mainland has seen in the last thirty years, namely annual average economic growth of 8.9%.
Under the KMT administration from 1993 to 1999, Taiwan continued to grow at the rate of 5.9% per annum and was the second best among the 8 major Asian economies. From 2001 to 2007 under Chen and his DPP party Taiwan’s economic growth rate fell to 4.2% per annum and came in last among the 8 Asian economies.
The legacy of Chen’s dismal performance on the economic front along with his blatantly corrupt practices has led to a disenchanted populace that greatly distrusts the government. According to recent polls taken in Taiwan by the economist, after two years under Ma Yingjeou, the people of Taiwan have more confidence in the KMT than DPP in being able to get along with Beijing. By better than 3 to 2, people of Taiwan believed KMT can better protect Taiwan’s interest with Beijing than can the DPP.
The sociologist from Taiwan then reported that integration between Taiwan and the mainland has proceeded to a degree far more extensively than has been generally understood. In the mid 1980’s the “unplanned” migration of Taiwanese businesses to the mainland may have been economically driven, but because of their socio-cultural affinity with the mainland, they have thrived. There are now more than one million Taiwanese business people in just the greater Shanghai area.
Another sign of integration not widely reported, he said, Taiwanese fishing boats off the Somalia coast have been routinely asking the PLA navy for escort service.
The second day of the symposium was to deal with the future of Taiwan and the dynamics of the triangle. Since I had to miss the second day, I felt unburdened by what was said to make my own observations in Part II of this blog.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Arms sales adds complexity to the U.S.-China-Taiwan Triangle
President Obama’s announcement to sell $6.4 billion of arms to Taiwan seems to have caught China by surprise. Some in Washington see Beijing’s reaction as a normal response when the U.S. raises the tension in the U.S.-China-Taiwan triangle while others are not so sure.
One thing is clear, however. Obama does not have the luxury of starting a confrontation with China. Many argued that coming into office facing the tsunami of a financial crisis, Obama needed China’s support of the dollar by continuing to buy and holding on to treasury notes. A soft, non-confrontational approach was the only way.
Thus Obama’s decision to sell arms to Taiwan can be read in at least two different ways. One is that Obama has established great rapport with the leaders of Beijing as a result of his November trip to China and arms sales was among the many subjects discussed, and that Obama’s announcement and Beijing’s response are orchestrated. In fact, some academicians inside China have been quoted as saying that Beijing’s official protest is for domestic consumption.
The other interpretation is that Obama’s trip to China was a failure as he did not come back with specific agreements that could be counted as wins. Obama, therefore, has decided to send the message that he, too, can play hardball. By offering only Black Hawk helicopters and Patriot missiles, but withholding advanced fighters and submarines, he is seen as saving a heavier punch for the future, in case he needs to ratchet up the tension by another notch.
This view, while fitting with the inclination of more hawkish analysts in Washington, seems to fly in face of what Obama has demonstrated from the oval office, namely, an intelligent leader who makes thoughtful and rational decisions. Furthermore, he continues to need China’s cooperation not only in the international arena such as Iran and North Korea but also to keep holding onto to the dollar. A confrontation with China does not seem to be in our national interest.
Official spokespersons from Washington justify the arms sales as a U.S. obligation “to ensure Taiwan’s self-defense capability.” This claim is a bit of an exaggeration. Compared to Taiwan, China has more than eight times the military personnel, five times more fighter aircrafts and 15 times more submarines, not to mention the thousands of missiles pointing at Taiwan. A few squadrons of helicopters are not going to tip the scale. (See a PLA analyst commenting on Taiwan's military.)
Obama’s announcement, coming on the heels of Taiwan president Ma Ying-jeou’s highly publicized diplomatic swing through Central America, including two transit stops in San Francisco and Los Angeles -- a privilege never accorded his predecessor -- is a win for Ma and probably intended for Taiwan’s internal consumption.
So the third interpretation of the arms sales and the following brouhaha can be read as staged for the benefit of the domestic audiences of all three countries in the trilateral relations. Ma’s political opposition has been attacking him for being soft on the mainland and leaving Taiwan defenseless. He can now claim to hold a stronger hand while he continues to engage Beijing on economic cooperation. Of course, Taiwan politics being what it is, the opposition is now complaining that the United State’s offer sets the price for the arms as much as 40% above market value.
Both Obama and Ma (in China they are referred to as two horses, “ma” being the word for horse) are hurting in their home approval ratings. While China’s President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao are not subject to popularity polls, strong approval at home is important to their ability to govern as well. Beijing’s pledged to retaliate against companies involved in the arms sale, no doubt, will make them popular at the home front.
It was only one administration ago that the White House spoke of containment of China. A significant part of the Washington establishment continues to regard China as an adversary. Selling arms to Taiwan may be politically necessary in response to domestic pressures, but such an announcement and possible future meetings with the Dalai Lama are not going to win China over as a partner in solving international crises.
Eventually, Obama will have to make up his mind whether to treat China as a friend or as a non-aligned third party, if not an outright adversary. A positive trip to China followed by offsetting moves on controversial issues such as arms sales to Taiwan will not accomplish the goal of gaining China as a valuable ally. And given the arrays of problems he is facing, Obama needs all the help he can get.
The above published by New America Media.
One thing is clear, however. Obama does not have the luxury of starting a confrontation with China. Many argued that coming into office facing the tsunami of a financial crisis, Obama needed China’s support of the dollar by continuing to buy and holding on to treasury notes. A soft, non-confrontational approach was the only way.
Thus Obama’s decision to sell arms to Taiwan can be read in at least two different ways. One is that Obama has established great rapport with the leaders of Beijing as a result of his November trip to China and arms sales was among the many subjects discussed, and that Obama’s announcement and Beijing’s response are orchestrated. In fact, some academicians inside China have been quoted as saying that Beijing’s official protest is for domestic consumption.
The other interpretation is that Obama’s trip to China was a failure as he did not come back with specific agreements that could be counted as wins. Obama, therefore, has decided to send the message that he, too, can play hardball. By offering only Black Hawk helicopters and Patriot missiles, but withholding advanced fighters and submarines, he is seen as saving a heavier punch for the future, in case he needs to ratchet up the tension by another notch.
This view, while fitting with the inclination of more hawkish analysts in Washington, seems to fly in face of what Obama has demonstrated from the oval office, namely, an intelligent leader who makes thoughtful and rational decisions. Furthermore, he continues to need China’s cooperation not only in the international arena such as Iran and North Korea but also to keep holding onto to the dollar. A confrontation with China does not seem to be in our national interest.
Official spokespersons from Washington justify the arms sales as a U.S. obligation “to ensure Taiwan’s self-defense capability.” This claim is a bit of an exaggeration. Compared to Taiwan, China has more than eight times the military personnel, five times more fighter aircrafts and 15 times more submarines, not to mention the thousands of missiles pointing at Taiwan. A few squadrons of helicopters are not going to tip the scale. (See a PLA analyst commenting on Taiwan's military.)
Obama’s announcement, coming on the heels of Taiwan president Ma Ying-jeou’s highly publicized diplomatic swing through Central America, including two transit stops in San Francisco and Los Angeles -- a privilege never accorded his predecessor -- is a win for Ma and probably intended for Taiwan’s internal consumption.
So the third interpretation of the arms sales and the following brouhaha can be read as staged for the benefit of the domestic audiences of all three countries in the trilateral relations. Ma’s political opposition has been attacking him for being soft on the mainland and leaving Taiwan defenseless. He can now claim to hold a stronger hand while he continues to engage Beijing on economic cooperation. Of course, Taiwan politics being what it is, the opposition is now complaining that the United State’s offer sets the price for the arms as much as 40% above market value.
Both Obama and Ma (in China they are referred to as two horses, “ma” being the word for horse) are hurting in their home approval ratings. While China’s President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao are not subject to popularity polls, strong approval at home is important to their ability to govern as well. Beijing’s pledged to retaliate against companies involved in the arms sale, no doubt, will make them popular at the home front.
It was only one administration ago that the White House spoke of containment of China. A significant part of the Washington establishment continues to regard China as an adversary. Selling arms to Taiwan may be politically necessary in response to domestic pressures, but such an announcement and possible future meetings with the Dalai Lama are not going to win China over as a partner in solving international crises.
Eventually, Obama will have to make up his mind whether to treat China as a friend or as a non-aligned third party, if not an outright adversary. A positive trip to China followed by offsetting moves on controversial issues such as arms sales to Taiwan will not accomplish the goal of gaining China as a valuable ally. And given the arrays of problems he is facing, Obama needs all the help he can get.
The above published by New America Media.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Chen Shui Bian's latest gambit
Certainly we can hardly accuse convicted felon and Taiwan's former president, Chen Shui-bian, for lack of imagination. His latest gambit for getting out of jail is to sue the United States and as part of the lawsuit, he has generously offered to come to Washington to testify on his own behalf--presumably at his own expense.
One can no doubt read about the basis of his suit in a number of places. SCMP is but one of them.
As one analysis from Taiwan pointed out the obvious,
In another story,
I met Ms. Tsai in 2001 as a member of the Committee of 100 delegation. At the time, she was a member of Chen's cabinet in charge of the cross straits relations. Chen was still in his "four no's and one don't have" mode and his true colors about Taiwan and China were still well hidden from view.
Educated in the U.S. and U.K., Tsai came across as a highly intelligent woman, all the more puzzling to us then as to why she was so thickheaded over any interest in warming the relations with the mainland, which ostensibly was her portfolio.
In retrospect, of course, it was obvious that she was following her boss' orders. But today she is the head of DPP and Chen has been drummed out of the party upon his conviction. Tsai has ample justification to distant herself and her party from Chen and thus disavow any connection to the corrupt practices of Chen's regime.
Why Tsai would continue to come to Chen's defense is open to speculation. A PhD recipient from London School of Economics, she surely has to appreciate the economic basket case that Taiwan became because of Chen's malfeasance. Surely it could not be admiration as cause of her continued loyalty.
Is it her desire not to offend the small group of Chen's adherents who continue to protest his innocence? Is it, heavens forbid, some linkage from Chen's hidden millions and to possible future financing of DPP activities? Perhaps time will tell us.
Chen desperately wanted to be out of jail. In order to help his own defense, he claimed. But while in jail, he had done all he can to impede his own attorney preparation of his defense. Realizing that he had no legitimate defense, it seemed his gambit then was to be as theatrically ludicrous as possible. Filing a lawsuit against the United States is his latest attempt along these lines.
In the meantime, prosecution is continuing to press new charges on Chen. This circus is not going to fold its big tent for years to come.
One can no doubt read about the basis of his suit in a number of places. SCMP is but one of them.
As one analysis from Taiwan pointed out the obvious,
What President Chen wants is to create a smokescreen under which he can get out of Tucheng, where he has been held since December 30 last year.
In another story,
Tsai Ing-wen, chairwoman of the Democratic Progressive Party, said: "The DPP demands that the ex-president is swiftly released so that he is able to defend himself freely."
I met Ms. Tsai in 2001 as a member of the Committee of 100 delegation. At the time, she was a member of Chen's cabinet in charge of the cross straits relations. Chen was still in his "four no's and one don't have" mode and his true colors about Taiwan and China were still well hidden from view.
Educated in the U.S. and U.K., Tsai came across as a highly intelligent woman, all the more puzzling to us then as to why she was so thickheaded over any interest in warming the relations with the mainland, which ostensibly was her portfolio.
In retrospect, of course, it was obvious that she was following her boss' orders. But today she is the head of DPP and Chen has been drummed out of the party upon his conviction. Tsai has ample justification to distant herself and her party from Chen and thus disavow any connection to the corrupt practices of Chen's regime.
Why Tsai would continue to come to Chen's defense is open to speculation. A PhD recipient from London School of Economics, she surely has to appreciate the economic basket case that Taiwan became because of Chen's malfeasance. Surely it could not be admiration as cause of her continued loyalty.
Is it her desire not to offend the small group of Chen's adherents who continue to protest his innocence? Is it, heavens forbid, some linkage from Chen's hidden millions and to possible future financing of DPP activities? Perhaps time will tell us.
Chen desperately wanted to be out of jail. In order to help his own defense, he claimed. But while in jail, he had done all he can to impede his own attorney preparation of his defense. Realizing that he had no legitimate defense, it seemed his gambit then was to be as theatrically ludicrous as possible. Filing a lawsuit against the United States is his latest attempt along these lines.
In the meantime, prosecution is continuing to press new charges on Chen. This circus is not going to fold its big tent for years to come.
Monday, September 14, 2009
The never ending story of Taiwan's Chen Shui Bian
Taiwan’s first opposition leader to be elected president, Chen Shui-bian, has just become the first to be convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for graft, corruption, embezzlement, money laundering and perjury.
His wife, Wu Shu-chen was also sentenced to jail for the rest of her life on similar charges. According to the prosecution, she knew more about money laundering than most drug cartels. Under her management, illicit funds were routinely moved up to 20 times to disguise the origin.
Many observers of Taiwan are surprised that Chen has come so far in this debacle. Most expected Chen and his family to have long flown the coop for safe havens where millions in cache are waiting for him.
Shih Ming-teh can only express sorrow over the outcome that has befallen his friend and former comrade-in-arms. Shih was one time leader of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) who spent 25 years in jail under the Kuomingtang regime. He was one of Chen’s early supporters when Chen first ran for presidency in 2000.
In 2006, Shih launched a massive protest against Chen’s blatant misconduct. Over 200,000 people in Taipei held a candle light vigil outside of the presidential palace demanding that Chen resign from office. Instead, Chen withstood the public’s withering voice of disapproval and stayed in office until the end of his term in 2008.
After the court’s decision of life imprisonment was handed down on September 11, Shih publicly expressed regret that Chen did not step down when he had the chance. Had he resigned under public pressure, Chen could have quietly left Taiwan and all the sordid details would not need to see the light of day and thus save Taiwan from having to contend with the embarrassing blot in its young venture into democracy.
Perhaps it was hubris that caused Chen and his first family not to take their ill gotten gains and run. He probably did not expect to be held in detention once he was arrested—ironically, on the grounds of flight risk—so that leaving Taiwan under the cover of darkness was no longer an option.
Instead Chen devoted his time in jail to making a mockery of Taiwan’s judiciary system. He went on periodic but highly publicized hunger strikes. He wrote books proclaiming his innocence. He and his wife selectively came up with reasons not to appear in court to disrupt proceedings whenever possible. He found fault with his attorneys and lambasted the judges.
Chen disowned any knowledge of the irregular financial dealings but accepted responsibility for not keeping track of what his family did.
Most incredulous of all, Chen proclaimed that he was railroaded by the long arms of Beijing complicit with the KMT as a pay-back for his pro independence stance while in office. He provided no evidence to support his contention. Instead his faithful long-time assistant gave chapter and verse on how he and the first family arm twisted Taiwan’s scions for millions and squeezed nickels and dimes out of every falsified expense receipt.
When Lee Teng-hui, the first native born Taiwanese to become president, came to the end of his term of office, he engineered a split among the KMT which enabled Chen to win his first term with less than 40% of the votes cast. Chen then won a squeaker of re-election with the help of a miraculous assassination attempt on election eve. The home made bullet grazed his stomach but more importantly netted enough sympathy votes to put him over the top.
By the second term, it was obvious to Lee that Chen was more interested in adding to his personal wealth than in governance of Taiwan. Although both men shared the same desire of separating Taiwan from China, Lee publicly criticized the “son of Taiwan” as the “shame of Taiwan.”
The sentence of life imprisonment is, of course, not the end of the story on Chen and the former first family. His case will be contested in successive courts of justice until it reaches Taiwan's highest court. A drawn out process could take the next 5 years and Chen’s misdeeds will be on display repeatedly before the people of Taiwan. Like fermented tofu, the salacious details are likely to ripen with further investigation and as more are willing to come forward to testify.
Chen began his presidency pledging clean government. Instead, everything was for sale--including another star for generals desiring a promotion. As his case, including new charges still pending, winds through Taiwan’s judiciary system, Taiwan will be reminded of his misconduct and his family’s involvement for years to come.
DPP, Chen’s old party, is in a quandary. A small but vocal group continues to insist on Chen’s innocence, convictions notwithstanding. Their defense of Chen is to attack the legitimacy of Taiwan’s rule of law and cast suspicion by accusing the current government of collusion with the mainland. Unable to unite in face of these noisy demonstrations, DPP is in disarray. The challenge for the people of Taiwan is to keep the disarray contained and not spread and infect the entire island.
=======================================
Read a polished version in New America Media.
His wife, Wu Shu-chen was also sentenced to jail for the rest of her life on similar charges. According to the prosecution, she knew more about money laundering than most drug cartels. Under her management, illicit funds were routinely moved up to 20 times to disguise the origin.
Many observers of Taiwan are surprised that Chen has come so far in this debacle. Most expected Chen and his family to have long flown the coop for safe havens where millions in cache are waiting for him.
Shih Ming-teh can only express sorrow over the outcome that has befallen his friend and former comrade-in-arms. Shih was one time leader of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) who spent 25 years in jail under the Kuomingtang regime. He was one of Chen’s early supporters when Chen first ran for presidency in 2000.
In 2006, Shih launched a massive protest against Chen’s blatant misconduct. Over 200,000 people in Taipei held a candle light vigil outside of the presidential palace demanding that Chen resign from office. Instead, Chen withstood the public’s withering voice of disapproval and stayed in office until the end of his term in 2008.
After the court’s decision of life imprisonment was handed down on September 11, Shih publicly expressed regret that Chen did not step down when he had the chance. Had he resigned under public pressure, Chen could have quietly left Taiwan and all the sordid details would not need to see the light of day and thus save Taiwan from having to contend with the embarrassing blot in its young venture into democracy.
Perhaps it was hubris that caused Chen and his first family not to take their ill gotten gains and run. He probably did not expect to be held in detention once he was arrested—ironically, on the grounds of flight risk—so that leaving Taiwan under the cover of darkness was no longer an option.
Instead Chen devoted his time in jail to making a mockery of Taiwan’s judiciary system. He went on periodic but highly publicized hunger strikes. He wrote books proclaiming his innocence. He and his wife selectively came up with reasons not to appear in court to disrupt proceedings whenever possible. He found fault with his attorneys and lambasted the judges.
Chen disowned any knowledge of the irregular financial dealings but accepted responsibility for not keeping track of what his family did.
Most incredulous of all, Chen proclaimed that he was railroaded by the long arms of Beijing complicit with the KMT as a pay-back for his pro independence stance while in office. He provided no evidence to support his contention. Instead his faithful long-time assistant gave chapter and verse on how he and the first family arm twisted Taiwan’s scions for millions and squeezed nickels and dimes out of every falsified expense receipt.
When Lee Teng-hui, the first native born Taiwanese to become president, came to the end of his term of office, he engineered a split among the KMT which enabled Chen to win his first term with less than 40% of the votes cast. Chen then won a squeaker of re-election with the help of a miraculous assassination attempt on election eve. The home made bullet grazed his stomach but more importantly netted enough sympathy votes to put him over the top.
By the second term, it was obvious to Lee that Chen was more interested in adding to his personal wealth than in governance of Taiwan. Although both men shared the same desire of separating Taiwan from China, Lee publicly criticized the “son of Taiwan” as the “shame of Taiwan.”
The sentence of life imprisonment is, of course, not the end of the story on Chen and the former first family. His case will be contested in successive courts of justice until it reaches Taiwan's highest court. A drawn out process could take the next 5 years and Chen’s misdeeds will be on display repeatedly before the people of Taiwan. Like fermented tofu, the salacious details are likely to ripen with further investigation and as more are willing to come forward to testify.
Chen began his presidency pledging clean government. Instead, everything was for sale--including another star for generals desiring a promotion. As his case, including new charges still pending, winds through Taiwan’s judiciary system, Taiwan will be reminded of his misconduct and his family’s involvement for years to come.
DPP, Chen’s old party, is in a quandary. A small but vocal group continues to insist on Chen’s innocence, convictions notwithstanding. Their defense of Chen is to attack the legitimacy of Taiwan’s rule of law and cast suspicion by accusing the current government of collusion with the mainland. Unable to unite in face of these noisy demonstrations, DPP is in disarray. The challenge for the people of Taiwan is to keep the disarray contained and not spread and infect the entire island.
=======================================
Read a polished version in New America Media.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Evaluation of Taiwan's Ma Ying-jeou
Taiwan's president, Ma Ying-jeou, has been in office for one year. After his first hundred days, he was criticized for not immediately turning Taiwan's economy around, as he had promised during the presidential campaign.
When Ma orchestrated a warming of cross strait relationship that led to signing a number of economic cooperation including the direct flight from the mainland to bring in tourists, he was immediately criticized for failing to attract 3000 tourists per day to Taiwan. This year, Taiwan is receiving the full daily quota of tourists from the mainland, the local economy is beginning to warm and discussion is now directed toward possible direct investment from the mainland.
Rather than giving any credit for the positive outcome by his administration, extreme pan green supporters are accusing Ma of prosecutorial persecution of Chen Shui Bian. Even though he has steadfastly stayed away from interfering with the judiciary process underway to examine the full extent of Chen's economic crime against the people of Taiwan, Chen's supporters accused him for doing so anyway.
Recently, I attended a conference at Stanford on state of the cross strait relations. The presenters and discussants were uniformedly courteous and genteel. None saw fit to point out Chen's singularly pivotal role in destroying Taiwan's economy during his eight year reign.
"It's the economy, stupid" has been the mantra that governed the success or failure of the last three U.S. president, including the current Obama Administration, but somehow this measure of a leader's effectiveness never applied to Chen.
Since the beginning of 2009, the Taiwan stock market has bounced back by 50%, the strongest recovery in Asia. The Stanford conference took little note and did not even speculate on whether Taiwan's economic recovery and its dependence on cooperation with the mainland will alter the dynamics of the question of independence vs. reunification vs. status quo.
For more information, a recent review of Ma's first year as president published by a major daily in Taiwan and is available in English.
When Ma orchestrated a warming of cross strait relationship that led to signing a number of economic cooperation including the direct flight from the mainland to bring in tourists, he was immediately criticized for failing to attract 3000 tourists per day to Taiwan. This year, Taiwan is receiving the full daily quota of tourists from the mainland, the local economy is beginning to warm and discussion is now directed toward possible direct investment from the mainland.
Rather than giving any credit for the positive outcome by his administration, extreme pan green supporters are accusing Ma of prosecutorial persecution of Chen Shui Bian. Even though he has steadfastly stayed away from interfering with the judiciary process underway to examine the full extent of Chen's economic crime against the people of Taiwan, Chen's supporters accused him for doing so anyway.
Recently, I attended a conference at Stanford on state of the cross strait relations. The presenters and discussants were uniformedly courteous and genteel. None saw fit to point out Chen's singularly pivotal role in destroying Taiwan's economy during his eight year reign.
"It's the economy, stupid" has been the mantra that governed the success or failure of the last three U.S. president, including the current Obama Administration, but somehow this measure of a leader's effectiveness never applied to Chen.
Since the beginning of 2009, the Taiwan stock market has bounced back by 50%, the strongest recovery in Asia. The Stanford conference took little note and did not even speculate on whether Taiwan's economic recovery and its dependence on cooperation with the mainland will alter the dynamics of the question of independence vs. reunification vs. status quo.
For more information, a recent review of Ma's first year as president published by a major daily in Taiwan and is available in English.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Twists and turns of Chen Shui-bian
Some months ago I speculated on various strategies that Chen Shui-bian was likely to adopt as he attempted to wriggle out of a mountain of corruption charges the Taiwan government was preparing against him. I alluded to classic Chinese strategies as the foundation to his possible escape from justice.
What I overlooked was a modern escape hatch not available in the ancient times in China, and that was to plead not guilty of corruption by reason of insanity. That his increasingly bizarre behavior seemed to suggest a planned or possibly genuine spiral towards total irrationality was recently proposed by a major daily in Taiwan.
Chen is the man many accused of orchestrating his own assassination attempt (obviously unsuccessfully) in a last minute ploy to squeeze out a win a hotly contested election. As president of Taiwan, Chen was also the leader who successfully convinced the people of Taiwan for 8 years that the tanking economy was of no consequence to their daily lives. That he can succeed in bamboozling Taiwan for so long suggests that pinning the criminal guilt on this slipperiest of politicians will be a test of Taiwan judiciary system.
What I overlooked was a modern escape hatch not available in the ancient times in China, and that was to plead not guilty of corruption by reason of insanity. That his increasingly bizarre behavior seemed to suggest a planned or possibly genuine spiral towards total irrationality was recently proposed by a major daily in Taiwan.
Chen is the man many accused of orchestrating his own assassination attempt (obviously unsuccessfully) in a last minute ploy to squeeze out a win a hotly contested election. As president of Taiwan, Chen was also the leader who successfully convinced the people of Taiwan for 8 years that the tanking economy was of no consequence to their daily lives. That he can succeed in bamboozling Taiwan for so long suggests that pinning the criminal guilt on this slipperiest of politicians will be a test of Taiwan judiciary system.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Taiwan's Chen Shui Bian, political prisoner or just crooked politician?
A historic moment is being recorded in Taiwan, albeit not a proud one. After months of dodging and weaving, former Taiwan president Chen Shui-bian was finally taken to jail on November 12 to face charges of corruption.
Chen is accused of embezzling NT$14.8 million (about $400,000) in secret state funds, laundering US$21 million in funds abroad and accepting as yet undetermined millions of New Taiwan dollars under the table from Taiwan businessmen.
He admitted that his wife transferred $21 million to secret Swiss accounts, but without his knowledge. Furthermore, he had done nothing wrong and the money rightfully belonged to him anyway.
Besides proclaiming his innocence, he mounted an offense accusing the prosecution and the judiciary of acting as pawns of the ruling Kuomingtang (KMT) to turn him into a political scapegoat. Chen claimed that by discrediting him, the KMT hoped to discredit his party, the DPP, before the people of Taiwan.
While the leaders of the DPP opposition have protested the “undignified” arrest of Chen and questioned the necessity of having to handcuff him like a common criminal, no one among the DPP leadership has stepped forward to vouch for Chen’s integrity and veracity.
Chen was the 12th in the series arrested in connection with the investigation of corruption during his term of office. All the arrests that preceded him were members of his staff, officials that reported to him, or friends and family. Other members of his immediate family including his wife have been forbidden to leave Taiwan pending further investigations and court appearances.
The week before his arrest, there was another historic event when Chen Yunlin, Beijing’s chief cross-strait negotiator came to Taiwan to sign several breakthrough agreements and meet briefly with Ma Ying-jeou, the current president of Taiwan. It was a first for a Beijing official to meet with the elected leader of Taiwan since the Nationalist government fled the mainland and set up in Taiwan.
The agreements will increase daily flights from Taiwan to more destinations on the mainland and all flights will be direct and not have to detour over Hong Kong airspace. Direct shipping will be allowed as well as improved mail service and better assurance of food safety. This became known as the “four agreements.”
The agreements could prove to be historically important in furthering cross-strait economic cooperation. The meeting with Ma could mark the symbolic beginning of the eventual cross-strait unification.
For weeks leading up to this cross-strait summit, the DPP had staged a number of public protests in opposition and in the name of Taiwan independence and sovereignty. Chen Shui-bian, though uninvited by the organizers, was active and prominent in these agitations. The DPP led mob even trapped Chen Yunlin in a hotel where a hosted banquet took place and the Beijing official was not allowed to leave for eight hours.
Despite such vociferous protest by the opposition, polls taken later revealed that less than 17% of the Taiwanese population opposed the four agreements. Less than 26% of the people supported the DPP protest while over 59% did not.
After Taiwan’s security force came to arrest Chen Shui-bian, he made one last attempt to avoid jail by complaining that he was injured by the rough handling police. He was promptly taken to the hospital where the doctors diagnosed a slight muscle strain due to over exertion of his shoulders. He strained his shoulders trying to show his handcuffs to the media.
Since Chen became inmate #2630, he began a hunger strike, protesting that he had become a political prisoner of the KMT. Shih Ming-teh, former chairman of DPP and former political prisoner under KMT, dismissed Chen’s antics saying that his refusal to eat will not transform Chen from a suspect in corruption and money laundering into a political prisoner.
History will only have to wait for the actual trial when the case against Chen is presented in court to examine the full extent of Chen’s offense. If convicted, he could spend the next 10 to 30 years of his life in prison. If not, Chen will become the martyr of his dream.
The importance of Ma’s meeting with the Beijing official will take longer to assess. If the historic meeting and four agreements become the foundation of ever closer integration across the straits, the memory of first meeting will fade and be replaced by a succession of higher profile summits and official proclamations.
==============================
An edited version appeared on November 17, 2008 in New America Media.
Chen is accused of embezzling NT$14.8 million (about $400,000) in secret state funds, laundering US$21 million in funds abroad and accepting as yet undetermined millions of New Taiwan dollars under the table from Taiwan businessmen.
He admitted that his wife transferred $21 million to secret Swiss accounts, but without his knowledge. Furthermore, he had done nothing wrong and the money rightfully belonged to him anyway.
Besides proclaiming his innocence, he mounted an offense accusing the prosecution and the judiciary of acting as pawns of the ruling Kuomingtang (KMT) to turn him into a political scapegoat. Chen claimed that by discrediting him, the KMT hoped to discredit his party, the DPP, before the people of Taiwan.
While the leaders of the DPP opposition have protested the “undignified” arrest of Chen and questioned the necessity of having to handcuff him like a common criminal, no one among the DPP leadership has stepped forward to vouch for Chen’s integrity and veracity.
Chen was the 12th in the series arrested in connection with the investigation of corruption during his term of office. All the arrests that preceded him were members of his staff, officials that reported to him, or friends and family. Other members of his immediate family including his wife have been forbidden to leave Taiwan pending further investigations and court appearances.
The week before his arrest, there was another historic event when Chen Yunlin, Beijing’s chief cross-strait negotiator came to Taiwan to sign several breakthrough agreements and meet briefly with Ma Ying-jeou, the current president of Taiwan. It was a first for a Beijing official to meet with the elected leader of Taiwan since the Nationalist government fled the mainland and set up in Taiwan.
The agreements will increase daily flights from Taiwan to more destinations on the mainland and all flights will be direct and not have to detour over Hong Kong airspace. Direct shipping will be allowed as well as improved mail service and better assurance of food safety. This became known as the “four agreements.”
The agreements could prove to be historically important in furthering cross-strait economic cooperation. The meeting with Ma could mark the symbolic beginning of the eventual cross-strait unification.
For weeks leading up to this cross-strait summit, the DPP had staged a number of public protests in opposition and in the name of Taiwan independence and sovereignty. Chen Shui-bian, though uninvited by the organizers, was active and prominent in these agitations. The DPP led mob even trapped Chen Yunlin in a hotel where a hosted banquet took place and the Beijing official was not allowed to leave for eight hours.
Despite such vociferous protest by the opposition, polls taken later revealed that less than 17% of the Taiwanese population opposed the four agreements. Less than 26% of the people supported the DPP protest while over 59% did not.
After Taiwan’s security force came to arrest Chen Shui-bian, he made one last attempt to avoid jail by complaining that he was injured by the rough handling police. He was promptly taken to the hospital where the doctors diagnosed a slight muscle strain due to over exertion of his shoulders. He strained his shoulders trying to show his handcuffs to the media.
Since Chen became inmate #2630, he began a hunger strike, protesting that he had become a political prisoner of the KMT. Shih Ming-teh, former chairman of DPP and former political prisoner under KMT, dismissed Chen’s antics saying that his refusal to eat will not transform Chen from a suspect in corruption and money laundering into a political prisoner.
History will only have to wait for the actual trial when the case against Chen is presented in court to examine the full extent of Chen’s offense. If convicted, he could spend the next 10 to 30 years of his life in prison. If not, Chen will become the martyr of his dream.
The importance of Ma’s meeting with the Beijing official will take longer to assess. If the historic meeting and four agreements become the foundation of ever closer integration across the straits, the memory of first meeting will fade and be replaced by a succession of higher profile summits and official proclamations.
==============================
An edited version appeared on November 17, 2008 in New America Media.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
What America Needs to Know about China
Below is text of address delivered at Pitzer College
Thank you for coming to hear what I have to say about China and about the U.S. China bilateral relations. As a business consultant, I have been going to China regularly for the last 30 years, essentially from the beginning of China’s economic reform. My first personal visit to China actually took place in 1974, during the height of the Great Cultural Revolution. I certainly have enjoyed a ringside seat watching China’s amazing transition and transformation during this period.
In my early trips into China, I would be interviewed by the CIA and the FBI upon my return. They would want to know whom I saw, what we talked about and so on. I was happy to tell them all I knew because from the start, I thought I had a mission, which was to explain China to Americans and America to the Chinese. I felt that I was in the position to act as a bridge between the two countries that meant the most to me.
Thirty years later, some things have not changed much. In particular, there remains a lot about China that America does not understand and I continue to feel that the role of a cultural intermediary is as relevant as ever. So it is today that I am here to describe and explain some things about China that America needs to know and understand--such understanding being crucial to the development of a healthy bilateral relationship. As the two arguably most powerful nations and economies in the world, a strong positive bilateral relationship is important not only to the peoples of the two countries but to a peaceful world.
I might also add that given the recent financial turmoil on Wall Street and the increasing importance of China, holding close to $1 trillion or our treasury notes and government debt, it becomes increasing relevant that we develop a measure of respect for someone that is likely to end up owning a bit of America in exchange for bailing us of out of our financial excesses.
My talk today is not about western media distortion of China or the biases of western politicians. If it is, I would be on the podium for hours. What I hope to do is to take you outside of your customary American frame of reference. I would like to present some data and thoughts that would automatically counter many of the preconceptions of China that you have grown up with. To paraphrase Secretary Paulson from his Foreign Affairs article about China, I want to help you see the country as it actually is, not as many Americans imagine it to be. If I can persuade you to rethink about China, I would feel that I have accomplished something worthwhile today.
Olympics Aftermath
Let’s start with the Olympics. By most accounts, the Beijing Olympics was an overwhelming success. Certainly, the people of China, and for that matter most of the overseas ethnic Chinese, are rightfully proud of the number of gold and medals the Chinese athletes won. But frankly, that was not the most significant achievement in my mind. Considering that Australia won 42 medals with a population of 21 million, that’s two medals for every million population. To attain parity on a per capita basis, the U.S. would have to win more than five times their actual tally. For China, they would have to sweep every event and then supplement with plenty of knock-offs to meet that standard. On the other hand, if one were to measure achievement against the level of economic development, Ethiopia, Jamaica and Georgia would come in first, second and third.
There are many ways to slice and dice the Olympic outcome, but more important in my mind, is that billions of people in the world have tuned in and caught a glimpse of today’s China for possibly their first time without the filter of the western media or political leaders or the bias of some religious cult. I thought NBC did a good job of introducing some of China’s culture to their viewing audience, particularly short vignettes such as Shaolin martial arts by Mary Carillo and hand pulled noodles by Martin Yan. I was also impressed with GE and their commercials specially done just for the Olympics—sort of like commercials geared just for the Super Bowls--using authentic Chinese backdrops and storylines to make their point.
Despite all the anti Olympic torch rallies and sentiments advocating another Olympic boycott, some even go so far as to call this the “genocide Olympics,” a record number of 100 heads of state representing 80 different countries attended the opening ceremony. They did not witness any slaughter of innocents but did see that the Chinese could really put on a show and raised the bar that likely will stand for many future Olympics. I am glad that Mr. Steven Spielberg was not involved so as not to confuse the minds of the viewers as to who contributed what. The visitors left after seeing a virtually flawless execution of a 16-day event. The 10,000 athletes from around world went home with, I am sure, memories to last a life time.
The 30,000 some journalists found different perspectives and events to write about and most, by and large, will further understanding between the East and West. The worst example of going out of his way to look for dirt under the carpet, that I happened to have read, was a near hysteric blog on ESPN accusing Beijing of a cover-up because a building under construction was draped by a beautifully decorated plastic sheet to hide the construction in progress underneath. Why an attempt to present a more pleasant public appearance became an excuse to blacken China is something I do not understand.
The Chinese Spy that Never Was
How many of you read Physics Today regularly? In the September issue, there is an article written by the former Secretary of Air Force talking about the period in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s when Chinese scientists were attending scientific conferences in the U.S. As the testimony at the Cox Committee hearing later revealed, the American authorities regarded these attendances as intelligence gathering on the part of the Chinese. Actually, just opposite was going on, the visitors, according to Thomas Reed, the author, was trying to find ways to let America know what China was doing in nuclear weapon development.
These visitors found Danny Stillman, a nuclear weapon scientist at Los Alamos who was charged with gathering intelligence on China’s weapon development—a polite way of saying that he was a spy. Stillman was eager to meet and talk to the Chinese visitors, who in turn invited Stillman to visit China. Through a series of visits over months to various secret facilities including the nuclear testing grounds, Stillman came away thoroughly impressed with what China had done. He put all his trip reports together into a cohesive tome and sought permission to publish his book. The U.S. government said no.
Stillman’s timing was bad. The Congressional Committee headed by then Representative Christopher Cox had just concluded that America was running wild with Chinese spies, that every Chinese company was a front to steal secrets from America. And then Dr. Wen Ho Lee was identified as the one who leaked W-88 multi-head missile technology to China. It would have contradicted all that anti-China rhetoric if Stillman’s book were to come out saying that China detonated their first atomic bomb in 1964 and in a mere 32 months their first H-bomb and launched their first unmanned satellite in 1970. The unacceptable conclusion would have been that China has independently developed their first class nuclear weaponry all along--all of it having taken place well before Nixon went to China in 1972 and before exchanges were taking place between the two countries. Stillman’s book had to be suppressed as it would have taken the hot air out of the hysterical China bashing balloon floating around Washington from 1998 to 2000.
Why, you might ask, did the Chinese want to expose their nuclear secrets to the U.S.? I think the answer is very simple. How can you have a nuclear deterrence if the other side doesn’t know that you have the capability to deter? China has consistently declined to join the arms race to see who can pile up the larger heap of ever more sophisticated arms. But once in a while, I think, China feels that Washington and Pentagon need to be updated and be informed that China has a credible 2nd strike capability to retaliate and enter that data into their calculations when they plot the course to world domination. Of course, this leads to the question of whether the DoD’s current expanding defense budget makes any sense, which we can discuss in the Q&A if you wish.
America’s Racism
Personally I am acutely aware of the historic racial bias of the American authorities towards the ethnic Chinese in America as exemplified by the Congressional hearings and by the case of Wen Ho Lee, where after 9 months of solitary confinement, all the charges against him were dropped except for one, and that was for not following lab procedure and downloading files from office computer to home computer. Just think, nine months of solitary confinement for downloading computer files against procedure. The special agent of the FBI involved in this case had to admit in court that he lied. The presiding judge apologized to Dr. Lee on behalf of the government for their misconduct. It had to be one of the more embarrassing chapters of American justice.
Lest you think the Wen Ho Lee case was an isolated aberration, it is not. I live in Silicon Valley and there are frequent cases of miscarriage of justice and official intimidation. Recently, there was a Bill Chen originally from China who was appointed sales manager to sell vibration tables to China. The government accused him of selling the tables to a missile building facility when his sales report indicated that they went to a locomotive factory. Originally his employer supported his defense but then the government quietly informed the company that if they plan to sell any more tables to the American Air Force, they better withdraw their support. The company had to fire him. He was in limbo for some time before the government dropped all charges. The last public statement he made to the local press last year was that his career was ruined and he was taking his family back to China.
Just earlier this year, there was a case involving another PhD whose expertise was in agriculture remote sensing, involving the use of satellite data to predict crop harvest, and had been in this country for 20 years. He came to the U.S. from China to study for his PhD. Most recently he worked for a contract research organization analyzing publicly available satellite data to quantify global climate changes for NASA at its facility in Mountain View. His work had no connection to national security. He even got clearance for his ID badge to enter NASA at will. Then the FBI came to interview him, followed by a lie detector test and then two more interviews, at the end of which he was escorted off the premises and fired. He never could figure out why the FBI came to see him and on what grounds he was dismissed. The only explanation I could offer him was that the special-agent-in-charge of Silicon Valley had told BBC in a public interview that the valley was crawling with spies from China and that every working Chinese was a potential security risk.
There are, of course, costs associated with the national practice of racial profiling. Let me ask you, which universities and colleges do you think, have sent the most number of graduates on to obtain a doctorate degree in America? If you guess UC Berkeley, you would be close but incorrect. According to National Science Foundation’s latest compilation, in 2006, the latest year of the survey, the two schools that contributed the most number of Bachelor degree holders that went on to earn a doctorate degree in the United States (in science or engineering) was Tsinghua and Beijing University. This is the first time in history where two Chinese institutions of higher learning out supplied the American universities. Berkeley was third. Over the period of 1999 to 2006, over 26 thousand doctorates earned their undergraduate degrees from China. For 2006, the latest year reported, for every 6 that got their undergraduate training from the U.S., one more came from China. So the question to ponder is this: Given the racist attitudes that prevail, how many of these PhD’s would remain in the U.S. after getting their degree, and of those that remain how many would risk their careers by working in a national laboratory?
Shipping Jobs Overseas
This bias against ethnic Chinese in this country has been around since the 19th century. This prejudice is tied to how we feel about China which is why I personally want to do what I can to counter the China bashing rhetoric by our political leaders. The first one I would like to tackle is the question of so-called “shipping jobs overseas.” According to the National Association of Manufacturers, manufacturing from the U.S. contributes 22% of the total global output with a workforce of about 14 million, by far the leader of the world. China, the rising manufacturing power that we love to demonize, contributes just 8% and with a workforce as large as 100 million if the migrant workers in rural industries are included--22% with 14 million versus 8% with 100 million, that is roughly 20 fold difference in productivity. It should immediately become obvious that there is no way that the American worker would be willing to take a humongous pay cut to do the low paying jobs being done in China. The Chinese might wish to move up the value chain and take over the American job but their productivity (and capability) has a long way to go. The next time you hear about shipping jobs overseas, you should challenge the speaker not to sprout nonsense.
China’s emergence in becoming the global factory really began in earnest when China entered WTO (World Trade Organization) in 2001. In order to conform to the stipulations of membership, China had to stop subsidizing inefficient, state-owned enterprises and let some of them go belly up. They knew that the price to be paid was to put around 30 million of their workers out on the streets. Led by Premier Zhu Rongji, China accepted the pain because they saw the long term benefits of competing in the global market. China made the right choice and hopefully America will also have the courage to make the hard decisions necessary to overcome their current economic dilemma. Blaming China is not going to cut it.
China, the Polluter
Now, China’s rapid economic development does come at a price and the most serious would be the environmental cost. In recent weeks, lambasting China for runaway pollution damage has become a fashionable diatribe for the politicians. They seem offended that China is soon going to overtake us as the biggest polluter in the world. Our political leaders say: “How dare the Chinese insist that we take the lead in pollution abatement before they, India and the rest of developing countries take corrective measures?”
I used to think well, the politicians have a point there. But then a July 31, 2008 press release from the The Climate Group caught my attention. The lead paragraph of this press release said. “China is already the world’s leading renewable energy producer and is over taking more developed economies in the exploiting valuable economic opportunities, creating green collar jobs and leading development of critical low carbon technologies.” The report goes on to say that China has the advantage of low cost, a clear policy framework, a dynamic and entrepreneurial business environment and plenty of abatement opportunities. I must admit until I read the report, I didn't know that China is already a leader in the Green revolution. That China is already a world leader in the manufacture of solar panels and wind turbines. That China is introducing fuel efficiency standards for cars which are 40% higher than those in the U.S. Forty percent! While Washington continues to talk about going green, China has been doing something about it. I have no expertise on China’s effort to go green and I was really surprised by the strong definitive statements from this non-profit organization, organized in 2004 in multiple countries to promote a green and clean earth. However, in recent separate visits to Beijing, my friends and I can testify to seeing blue skies, so there must be something to this report.
Human Rights & Democracy
Now let’s talk about human rights and democracy. First, I find it ironic that the country who perpetrated Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and the fine art of waterboarding should be the leading critic of others facing their own set of human rights challenges. I believe that at the very least, the very visible and prompt manner that authorities came to the rescue of the unfortunate victims of the giant earthquake in Sichuan showed to the world that the Chinese government is not a callous body but cares as much about its people as any responsible government.
There are at least 56 ethnic groups living in peaceful co-existence inside China. Official policies go out of their way to favor the 55 ethnic minorities such as no single child restrictions and a Chinese version of affirmative action that makes it easier for minorities to get a higher education. During my travels inside China, I have met folks that are half Han and half another minority. Invariably when they fill out their residence registration (hukou), they claim to be the minority and not a Han majority in order to take advantage of the more favorable conditions. I cannot recall ever talking to a Chinese citizen that disparages another because of the other person’s ethnicity. Conversely, every minority person will openly admit that they belong to Bai, or Miao, or Korean, or Hui, or Mongolian, or Tibetan, or whatever minority in the course of normal conversation. They can be proud of who they are and do not feel that they need to hide their ethnic identity.
We do blanch at how quickly China carried out the executions of the condemned. It’s sort of “one strike and you’re out.” But it is not our place to condone or condemn China’s administration of justice. They have a huge population to deal with and how to maintain order and stability in such a society is beyond our American experience and expertise. Human rights abuses abound in China, such as children in sweat shops, slave labor camps, tainted blood transfusions, toxic baby formulas and so on. These are appalling situations, but it’s important to bear in mind that the Chinese government is combating the problems and not condoning them—no more than the U.S. government condoning many of the human right abuses in this country.
The city of Shenzhen bordering Hong Kong, which a quarter of a century ago was nothing more than rice paddies and fishing boats, has been the greatest experiment since China launched its reform. Up to now, the reform is most visible economically, but they have just announced that the mayor will be the first of China’s major cities to be elected and not appointed. This is a major step for China.
Chinese officials have been talking about democracy even back in Mao days but always within a single political party and not in a pluralistic framework. We Americans have trouble understanding the seeming contradiction of a democracy functioning within a single party rule. We are befuddled, I think, partly because we are accustomed to associating exercise of democracy with serious fundraising and that money is what makes democracy go around.
But there is something to be said about the Chinese system of governing. Leaders are judged and promoted based on the merits of their past performance. They are tested every step along the way. They rise to the top, not dependent on their lineage and on their cronies and public persona. In their selection process, the candidate who knows how to stay low key and keep a low profile (di diao in Chinese) is more likely to be promoted over the handsome, flamboyant and dynamic orator. These promotions came not because of unilateral decisions of a strong man but through consensus, compromise and horse trading between various factions.
China’s Foreign Policy
China’s foreign policy is also diametrically different from the U.S. China has insisted on non-interference of the internal affairs and non-infringement of the sovereignty of another country and to work within the confines of the United Nations. They have contributed troops and police in 13 of 17 on-going UN Peacekeeping operations. Since 1990, China has contributed 9000 peacekeepers in 22 UN operations, more than the combined total of the other four permanent members of the Security Council. As of the end of 2007, China has exercised its veto power on the Security Council a total of 6 times since they joined that body. During that same period, USSR/Russia cast 123 vetoes, the U.S. 80 times, UK 32 and France 18.
I would like to describe just one example of China’s foreign policy based on the exercise of soft power and on the principle of mutual benefit. About a year ago, China signed a deal with Congo to work on infrastructure projects in accordance with the Congo government’s priorities, which were water, electricity, education, health and transportation. The total cost will exceed $9 billion, far more than Congo’s annual budget of $1.3 billion. To pay for the infrastructure investment, China formed a JV with Congo to extract copper, nickel and cobalt, a $3 billion investment. Presumably, the Congo side will pay for their share of the investment with their share of the extracted minerals. Other parts of the deal include technology transfer and training of Congolese staff, work on social welfare and environment and subcontracting certain work to local Congolese companies.
The deal is neither colonial exploitation nor charity to a destitute developing nation. China is not telling the Congo government how to run their country and make no judgment on whether the government is to their liking. Instead, they just structured a win-win arrangement that will make a difference in Congo quickly. The World Bank considers Congo one of the worst countries to conduct business. So the success of this cooperation is not assured. Hopefully the Congolese people will soon see and reap the benefits of this outcome.
The West likes to hold China responsible for Darfur. The premise seems to be that China is doing business with the Sudan government and Sudan government is using the revenue to commit genocide in Darfur. But China is not the only country doing a lot of business in Sudan. India, Japan and Russia are also major players. Furthermore, many years before China was involved in Sudan, the U.S. was there. The CIA backed the other faction and when that faction did not win control of the government, conflict resulted which gradually moved to the Darfur region. Needless to say, conflict takes two opposing parties, in this case the Sudanese government and the rebel faction. Since we Americans are backing the rebels, the government must be the bad guys. Just ask Mia Farrow.
At least last year, China was able persuade the Sudan government to allow a 20,000 strong UN-AU peace-keeping force into the Darfur region, and China took the lead in contributing peace keepers to the force. Unfortunately the force has not been effective, in part because other UN member and African nations have been slow to contribute their share of personnel. Everybody bears some responsibility for the tragedy that is Darfur, it is too easy just to fault China.
I would like to make a brief comment about Taiwan and Tibet so that we can move on to the Q&A, which is my favorite part of the program.
Taiwan & China
Taiwan has been economically integrated with the mainland for well over a decade. Taiwan is either the largest or second largest source of foreign direct investment in China. Entrepreneurs from Taiwan have made millions, and at least one billionaire, from China. Today, over one million Taiwanese live and work in China. Taiwan’s productizing expertise and understanding of the world market coupled with China’s manufacturing prowess has been a powerful amalgamation of complementary strengths. Taiwan’s early factories in China served as the foundation of China’s manufacturing strength. In turn, the components and sub-assemblies shipped from Taiwan across the straits for final assembly every year has earned Taiwan a trade surplus that has always exceeded the total trade deficit incurred with the rest of the world. The common culture, language and ethnicity across the straits have made the synergy a natural outcome.
Unfortunately for Taiwan, the last eight year under President Chen Shui-bian has been an absolute disaster. He did not care about how to manage Taiwan’s comparative advantages. He was much too busy figuring out ways to line his and his family’s pockets. He and his immediate family are currently under investigation for various money laundering schemes, hidden Swiss accounts and bogus accounts in Singapore, the U.S. and who knows where. Having stepped down, Chen lost his presidential immunity and the investigators are hot after many leads. The Taiwan stock market seems unable to get out of the free fall as nervous investors wonder how many of the listed companies are waiting to be implicated by the radiating circle of wrongdoing. It didn’t help that the incoming president Ma Ying-jeou campaigned on the promise of a quick turn-around in Taiwan’s economy. The voters took him literally and expected miracles in his first 100 days in office, and he has not delivered. It is fair to assume that he did not anticipate a financial scandal as he stepped into office.
Tibet & China
The Dalai Lama is an excellent proselytizer for Lamaism, a form of Buddhism--based on animism--indigenous to Tibet. In the case of His Holiness, admirers in the West seem willing to overlook the principles of separation of church and state. No doubt he is the religious leader of a majority (but not all) of the Tibetans. As a secular leader, he represents perhaps the 5% of the population that formerly belonged to the privileged ruling class. In his days, the other 95% were serfs and had no rights whatsoever. Today, China has invested heavily in the infrastructure and offered every Tibetan the opportunity to an education and the freedom to make a decent living by the dint of his/her own efforts. When Dalai Lama ruled Tibet, the average life expectancy was not even 36 years of age, now it’s 67; still less than China’s national average but far better than what it was. Today, Dalai Lama cannot legitimately champion the human rights of the Tibetan masses that had no rights when he was the titular ruler. I am planning to visit Tibet next year. Perhaps I will have more to say about this matter then.
At the beginning of my talk, I proposed raising a perspective about China different from the mainstream to stimulate your interest. I hope I have been provocative enough for this audience. I don’t know why it is that China is the favorite punching bag in the West--sometimes, I refer China as the go to piñata—but I believe this attitude is in for some adjustment. Let me quickly raise some other issues without elaboration to round out our topic.
• China has just put three astronauts in space along with a space walk and has plans to go to the moon. Heretofore, the U.S. has specifically excluded China from the space consortium membership that included Russia. Now NASA has been quietly meeting with China’s space officials about cooperation and leverage from technology that China has developed that NASA does not own. If we weren’t so darn sure that the Chinese needs to steal everything from us, we might have come to this realization sooner.
• China has steadfastly been buying U.S. treasury bills and agency notes and now owns close to $1 trillion of American debt. They have been buying even as Japan has been decreasing their holding for the very practical reason that the dollar is worth less and less. If you ask, the Treasury Department officials will privately admit to you that without China’s financial support, our economy would be in worse shape than it is.
• The Bush Administration made a hash of the relationship with North Korea. Without China’s assistance and leadership, the situation would be even more unstable than it is now.
• China built their Great Wall to keep foreigners out. They do not have the mentality or a history of conquering and occupying other countries. If that is the U.S. goal, China is unlikely to stand in the way. There is no need to regard China as an adversary so long we do not insist on their seeing everything our way.
• Just as China is rapidly becoming one of the most popular tourist destinations, China is also fast becoming the largest source of international tourists. Europeans will tell you that tourists from China are bigger spenders than Americans or Japanese. Until recently, we did not welcome tourists from China. This situation is changing to the potential benefit of our local economy.
• Just as China has become America’s largest source of foreign graduate students, China is also becoming a popular destination for foreign student. According to the most recent tally, China is the 6th most popular destination of the world for students going abroad. I hope some of you will take advantage study abroad opportunities to go to China and see for yourself. With more exchange of people will come improved mutual understanding and more acceptance of the other and different points of view and way of life. I believe this is important to the prospects of attaining world peace.
Now, I want to thank you for your attention and I welcome the opportunity to extend our discussion in any manner you, the audience would like. Please do allow me one small commercial. Much of what I presented today has been elaborated under various entries in my blog. I invite you to visit www.georgekoo.com and to share with others. I have also posted today’s speech on my blog if you wish to refer to anything I've said. Thank you.
Thank you for coming to hear what I have to say about China and about the U.S. China bilateral relations. As a business consultant, I have been going to China regularly for the last 30 years, essentially from the beginning of China’s economic reform. My first personal visit to China actually took place in 1974, during the height of the Great Cultural Revolution. I certainly have enjoyed a ringside seat watching China’s amazing transition and transformation during this period.
In my early trips into China, I would be interviewed by the CIA and the FBI upon my return. They would want to know whom I saw, what we talked about and so on. I was happy to tell them all I knew because from the start, I thought I had a mission, which was to explain China to Americans and America to the Chinese. I felt that I was in the position to act as a bridge between the two countries that meant the most to me.
Thirty years later, some things have not changed much. In particular, there remains a lot about China that America does not understand and I continue to feel that the role of a cultural intermediary is as relevant as ever. So it is today that I am here to describe and explain some things about China that America needs to know and understand--such understanding being crucial to the development of a healthy bilateral relationship. As the two arguably most powerful nations and economies in the world, a strong positive bilateral relationship is important not only to the peoples of the two countries but to a peaceful world.
I might also add that given the recent financial turmoil on Wall Street and the increasing importance of China, holding close to $1 trillion or our treasury notes and government debt, it becomes increasing relevant that we develop a measure of respect for someone that is likely to end up owning a bit of America in exchange for bailing us of out of our financial excesses.
My talk today is not about western media distortion of China or the biases of western politicians. If it is, I would be on the podium for hours. What I hope to do is to take you outside of your customary American frame of reference. I would like to present some data and thoughts that would automatically counter many of the preconceptions of China that you have grown up with. To paraphrase Secretary Paulson from his Foreign Affairs article about China, I want to help you see the country as it actually is, not as many Americans imagine it to be. If I can persuade you to rethink about China, I would feel that I have accomplished something worthwhile today.
Olympics Aftermath
Let’s start with the Olympics. By most accounts, the Beijing Olympics was an overwhelming success. Certainly, the people of China, and for that matter most of the overseas ethnic Chinese, are rightfully proud of the number of gold and medals the Chinese athletes won. But frankly, that was not the most significant achievement in my mind. Considering that Australia won 42 medals with a population of 21 million, that’s two medals for every million population. To attain parity on a per capita basis, the U.S. would have to win more than five times their actual tally. For China, they would have to sweep every event and then supplement with plenty of knock-offs to meet that standard. On the other hand, if one were to measure achievement against the level of economic development, Ethiopia, Jamaica and Georgia would come in first, second and third.
There are many ways to slice and dice the Olympic outcome, but more important in my mind, is that billions of people in the world have tuned in and caught a glimpse of today’s China for possibly their first time without the filter of the western media or political leaders or the bias of some religious cult. I thought NBC did a good job of introducing some of China’s culture to their viewing audience, particularly short vignettes such as Shaolin martial arts by Mary Carillo and hand pulled noodles by Martin Yan. I was also impressed with GE and their commercials specially done just for the Olympics—sort of like commercials geared just for the Super Bowls--using authentic Chinese backdrops and storylines to make their point.
Despite all the anti Olympic torch rallies and sentiments advocating another Olympic boycott, some even go so far as to call this the “genocide Olympics,” a record number of 100 heads of state representing 80 different countries attended the opening ceremony. They did not witness any slaughter of innocents but did see that the Chinese could really put on a show and raised the bar that likely will stand for many future Olympics. I am glad that Mr. Steven Spielberg was not involved so as not to confuse the minds of the viewers as to who contributed what. The visitors left after seeing a virtually flawless execution of a 16-day event. The 10,000 athletes from around world went home with, I am sure, memories to last a life time.
The 30,000 some journalists found different perspectives and events to write about and most, by and large, will further understanding between the East and West. The worst example of going out of his way to look for dirt under the carpet, that I happened to have read, was a near hysteric blog on ESPN accusing Beijing of a cover-up because a building under construction was draped by a beautifully decorated plastic sheet to hide the construction in progress underneath. Why an attempt to present a more pleasant public appearance became an excuse to blacken China is something I do not understand.
The Chinese Spy that Never Was
How many of you read Physics Today regularly? In the September issue, there is an article written by the former Secretary of Air Force talking about the period in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s when Chinese scientists were attending scientific conferences in the U.S. As the testimony at the Cox Committee hearing later revealed, the American authorities regarded these attendances as intelligence gathering on the part of the Chinese. Actually, just opposite was going on, the visitors, according to Thomas Reed, the author, was trying to find ways to let America know what China was doing in nuclear weapon development.
These visitors found Danny Stillman, a nuclear weapon scientist at Los Alamos who was charged with gathering intelligence on China’s weapon development—a polite way of saying that he was a spy. Stillman was eager to meet and talk to the Chinese visitors, who in turn invited Stillman to visit China. Through a series of visits over months to various secret facilities including the nuclear testing grounds, Stillman came away thoroughly impressed with what China had done. He put all his trip reports together into a cohesive tome and sought permission to publish his book. The U.S. government said no.
Stillman’s timing was bad. The Congressional Committee headed by then Representative Christopher Cox had just concluded that America was running wild with Chinese spies, that every Chinese company was a front to steal secrets from America. And then Dr. Wen Ho Lee was identified as the one who leaked W-88 multi-head missile technology to China. It would have contradicted all that anti-China rhetoric if Stillman’s book were to come out saying that China detonated their first atomic bomb in 1964 and in a mere 32 months their first H-bomb and launched their first unmanned satellite in 1970. The unacceptable conclusion would have been that China has independently developed their first class nuclear weaponry all along--all of it having taken place well before Nixon went to China in 1972 and before exchanges were taking place between the two countries. Stillman’s book had to be suppressed as it would have taken the hot air out of the hysterical China bashing balloon floating around Washington from 1998 to 2000.
Why, you might ask, did the Chinese want to expose their nuclear secrets to the U.S.? I think the answer is very simple. How can you have a nuclear deterrence if the other side doesn’t know that you have the capability to deter? China has consistently declined to join the arms race to see who can pile up the larger heap of ever more sophisticated arms. But once in a while, I think, China feels that Washington and Pentagon need to be updated and be informed that China has a credible 2nd strike capability to retaliate and enter that data into their calculations when they plot the course to world domination. Of course, this leads to the question of whether the DoD’s current expanding defense budget makes any sense, which we can discuss in the Q&A if you wish.
America’s Racism
Personally I am acutely aware of the historic racial bias of the American authorities towards the ethnic Chinese in America as exemplified by the Congressional hearings and by the case of Wen Ho Lee, where after 9 months of solitary confinement, all the charges against him were dropped except for one, and that was for not following lab procedure and downloading files from office computer to home computer. Just think, nine months of solitary confinement for downloading computer files against procedure. The special agent of the FBI involved in this case had to admit in court that he lied. The presiding judge apologized to Dr. Lee on behalf of the government for their misconduct. It had to be one of the more embarrassing chapters of American justice.
Lest you think the Wen Ho Lee case was an isolated aberration, it is not. I live in Silicon Valley and there are frequent cases of miscarriage of justice and official intimidation. Recently, there was a Bill Chen originally from China who was appointed sales manager to sell vibration tables to China. The government accused him of selling the tables to a missile building facility when his sales report indicated that they went to a locomotive factory. Originally his employer supported his defense but then the government quietly informed the company that if they plan to sell any more tables to the American Air Force, they better withdraw their support. The company had to fire him. He was in limbo for some time before the government dropped all charges. The last public statement he made to the local press last year was that his career was ruined and he was taking his family back to China.
Just earlier this year, there was a case involving another PhD whose expertise was in agriculture remote sensing, involving the use of satellite data to predict crop harvest, and had been in this country for 20 years. He came to the U.S. from China to study for his PhD. Most recently he worked for a contract research organization analyzing publicly available satellite data to quantify global climate changes for NASA at its facility in Mountain View. His work had no connection to national security. He even got clearance for his ID badge to enter NASA at will. Then the FBI came to interview him, followed by a lie detector test and then two more interviews, at the end of which he was escorted off the premises and fired. He never could figure out why the FBI came to see him and on what grounds he was dismissed. The only explanation I could offer him was that the special-agent-in-charge of Silicon Valley had told BBC in a public interview that the valley was crawling with spies from China and that every working Chinese was a potential security risk.
There are, of course, costs associated with the national practice of racial profiling. Let me ask you, which universities and colleges do you think, have sent the most number of graduates on to obtain a doctorate degree in America? If you guess UC Berkeley, you would be close but incorrect. According to National Science Foundation’s latest compilation, in 2006, the latest year of the survey, the two schools that contributed the most number of Bachelor degree holders that went on to earn a doctorate degree in the United States (in science or engineering) was Tsinghua and Beijing University. This is the first time in history where two Chinese institutions of higher learning out supplied the American universities. Berkeley was third. Over the period of 1999 to 2006, over 26 thousand doctorates earned their undergraduate degrees from China. For 2006, the latest year reported, for every 6 that got their undergraduate training from the U.S., one more came from China. So the question to ponder is this: Given the racist attitudes that prevail, how many of these PhD’s would remain in the U.S. after getting their degree, and of those that remain how many would risk their careers by working in a national laboratory?
Shipping Jobs Overseas
This bias against ethnic Chinese in this country has been around since the 19th century. This prejudice is tied to how we feel about China which is why I personally want to do what I can to counter the China bashing rhetoric by our political leaders. The first one I would like to tackle is the question of so-called “shipping jobs overseas.” According to the National Association of Manufacturers, manufacturing from the U.S. contributes 22% of the total global output with a workforce of about 14 million, by far the leader of the world. China, the rising manufacturing power that we love to demonize, contributes just 8% and with a workforce as large as 100 million if the migrant workers in rural industries are included--22% with 14 million versus 8% with 100 million, that is roughly 20 fold difference in productivity. It should immediately become obvious that there is no way that the American worker would be willing to take a humongous pay cut to do the low paying jobs being done in China. The Chinese might wish to move up the value chain and take over the American job but their productivity (and capability) has a long way to go. The next time you hear about shipping jobs overseas, you should challenge the speaker not to sprout nonsense.
China’s emergence in becoming the global factory really began in earnest when China entered WTO (World Trade Organization) in 2001. In order to conform to the stipulations of membership, China had to stop subsidizing inefficient, state-owned enterprises and let some of them go belly up. They knew that the price to be paid was to put around 30 million of their workers out on the streets. Led by Premier Zhu Rongji, China accepted the pain because they saw the long term benefits of competing in the global market. China made the right choice and hopefully America will also have the courage to make the hard decisions necessary to overcome their current economic dilemma. Blaming China is not going to cut it.
China, the Polluter
Now, China’s rapid economic development does come at a price and the most serious would be the environmental cost. In recent weeks, lambasting China for runaway pollution damage has become a fashionable diatribe for the politicians. They seem offended that China is soon going to overtake us as the biggest polluter in the world. Our political leaders say: “How dare the Chinese insist that we take the lead in pollution abatement before they, India and the rest of developing countries take corrective measures?”
I used to think well, the politicians have a point there. But then a July 31, 2008 press release from the The Climate Group caught my attention. The lead paragraph of this press release said. “China is already the world’s leading renewable energy producer and is over taking more developed economies in the exploiting valuable economic opportunities, creating green collar jobs and leading development of critical low carbon technologies.” The report goes on to say that China has the advantage of low cost, a clear policy framework, a dynamic and entrepreneurial business environment and plenty of abatement opportunities. I must admit until I read the report, I didn't know that China is already a leader in the Green revolution. That China is already a world leader in the manufacture of solar panels and wind turbines. That China is introducing fuel efficiency standards for cars which are 40% higher than those in the U.S. Forty percent! While Washington continues to talk about going green, China has been doing something about it. I have no expertise on China’s effort to go green and I was really surprised by the strong definitive statements from this non-profit organization, organized in 2004 in multiple countries to promote a green and clean earth. However, in recent separate visits to Beijing, my friends and I can testify to seeing blue skies, so there must be something to this report.
Human Rights & Democracy
Now let’s talk about human rights and democracy. First, I find it ironic that the country who perpetrated Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and the fine art of waterboarding should be the leading critic of others facing their own set of human rights challenges. I believe that at the very least, the very visible and prompt manner that authorities came to the rescue of the unfortunate victims of the giant earthquake in Sichuan showed to the world that the Chinese government is not a callous body but cares as much about its people as any responsible government.
There are at least 56 ethnic groups living in peaceful co-existence inside China. Official policies go out of their way to favor the 55 ethnic minorities such as no single child restrictions and a Chinese version of affirmative action that makes it easier for minorities to get a higher education. During my travels inside China, I have met folks that are half Han and half another minority. Invariably when they fill out their residence registration (hukou), they claim to be the minority and not a Han majority in order to take advantage of the more favorable conditions. I cannot recall ever talking to a Chinese citizen that disparages another because of the other person’s ethnicity. Conversely, every minority person will openly admit that they belong to Bai, or Miao, or Korean, or Hui, or Mongolian, or Tibetan, or whatever minority in the course of normal conversation. They can be proud of who they are and do not feel that they need to hide their ethnic identity.
We do blanch at how quickly China carried out the executions of the condemned. It’s sort of “one strike and you’re out.” But it is not our place to condone or condemn China’s administration of justice. They have a huge population to deal with and how to maintain order and stability in such a society is beyond our American experience and expertise. Human rights abuses abound in China, such as children in sweat shops, slave labor camps, tainted blood transfusions, toxic baby formulas and so on. These are appalling situations, but it’s important to bear in mind that the Chinese government is combating the problems and not condoning them—no more than the U.S. government condoning many of the human right abuses in this country.
The city of Shenzhen bordering Hong Kong, which a quarter of a century ago was nothing more than rice paddies and fishing boats, has been the greatest experiment since China launched its reform. Up to now, the reform is most visible economically, but they have just announced that the mayor will be the first of China’s major cities to be elected and not appointed. This is a major step for China.
Chinese officials have been talking about democracy even back in Mao days but always within a single political party and not in a pluralistic framework. We Americans have trouble understanding the seeming contradiction of a democracy functioning within a single party rule. We are befuddled, I think, partly because we are accustomed to associating exercise of democracy with serious fundraising and that money is what makes democracy go around.
But there is something to be said about the Chinese system of governing. Leaders are judged and promoted based on the merits of their past performance. They are tested every step along the way. They rise to the top, not dependent on their lineage and on their cronies and public persona. In their selection process, the candidate who knows how to stay low key and keep a low profile (di diao in Chinese) is more likely to be promoted over the handsome, flamboyant and dynamic orator. These promotions came not because of unilateral decisions of a strong man but through consensus, compromise and horse trading between various factions.
China’s Foreign Policy
China’s foreign policy is also diametrically different from the U.S. China has insisted on non-interference of the internal affairs and non-infringement of the sovereignty of another country and to work within the confines of the United Nations. They have contributed troops and police in 13 of 17 on-going UN Peacekeeping operations. Since 1990, China has contributed 9000 peacekeepers in 22 UN operations, more than the combined total of the other four permanent members of the Security Council. As of the end of 2007, China has exercised its veto power on the Security Council a total of 6 times since they joined that body. During that same period, USSR/Russia cast 123 vetoes, the U.S. 80 times, UK 32 and France 18.
I would like to describe just one example of China’s foreign policy based on the exercise of soft power and on the principle of mutual benefit. About a year ago, China signed a deal with Congo to work on infrastructure projects in accordance with the Congo government’s priorities, which were water, electricity, education, health and transportation. The total cost will exceed $9 billion, far more than Congo’s annual budget of $1.3 billion. To pay for the infrastructure investment, China formed a JV with Congo to extract copper, nickel and cobalt, a $3 billion investment. Presumably, the Congo side will pay for their share of the investment with their share of the extracted minerals. Other parts of the deal include technology transfer and training of Congolese staff, work on social welfare and environment and subcontracting certain work to local Congolese companies.
The deal is neither colonial exploitation nor charity to a destitute developing nation. China is not telling the Congo government how to run their country and make no judgment on whether the government is to their liking. Instead, they just structured a win-win arrangement that will make a difference in Congo quickly. The World Bank considers Congo one of the worst countries to conduct business. So the success of this cooperation is not assured. Hopefully the Congolese people will soon see and reap the benefits of this outcome.
The West likes to hold China responsible for Darfur. The premise seems to be that China is doing business with the Sudan government and Sudan government is using the revenue to commit genocide in Darfur. But China is not the only country doing a lot of business in Sudan. India, Japan and Russia are also major players. Furthermore, many years before China was involved in Sudan, the U.S. was there. The CIA backed the other faction and when that faction did not win control of the government, conflict resulted which gradually moved to the Darfur region. Needless to say, conflict takes two opposing parties, in this case the Sudanese government and the rebel faction. Since we Americans are backing the rebels, the government must be the bad guys. Just ask Mia Farrow.
At least last year, China was able persuade the Sudan government to allow a 20,000 strong UN-AU peace-keeping force into the Darfur region, and China took the lead in contributing peace keepers to the force. Unfortunately the force has not been effective, in part because other UN member and African nations have been slow to contribute their share of personnel. Everybody bears some responsibility for the tragedy that is Darfur, it is too easy just to fault China.
I would like to make a brief comment about Taiwan and Tibet so that we can move on to the Q&A, which is my favorite part of the program.
Taiwan & China
Taiwan has been economically integrated with the mainland for well over a decade. Taiwan is either the largest or second largest source of foreign direct investment in China. Entrepreneurs from Taiwan have made millions, and at least one billionaire, from China. Today, over one million Taiwanese live and work in China. Taiwan’s productizing expertise and understanding of the world market coupled with China’s manufacturing prowess has been a powerful amalgamation of complementary strengths. Taiwan’s early factories in China served as the foundation of China’s manufacturing strength. In turn, the components and sub-assemblies shipped from Taiwan across the straits for final assembly every year has earned Taiwan a trade surplus that has always exceeded the total trade deficit incurred with the rest of the world. The common culture, language and ethnicity across the straits have made the synergy a natural outcome.
Unfortunately for Taiwan, the last eight year under President Chen Shui-bian has been an absolute disaster. He did not care about how to manage Taiwan’s comparative advantages. He was much too busy figuring out ways to line his and his family’s pockets. He and his immediate family are currently under investigation for various money laundering schemes, hidden Swiss accounts and bogus accounts in Singapore, the U.S. and who knows where. Having stepped down, Chen lost his presidential immunity and the investigators are hot after many leads. The Taiwan stock market seems unable to get out of the free fall as nervous investors wonder how many of the listed companies are waiting to be implicated by the radiating circle of wrongdoing. It didn’t help that the incoming president Ma Ying-jeou campaigned on the promise of a quick turn-around in Taiwan’s economy. The voters took him literally and expected miracles in his first 100 days in office, and he has not delivered. It is fair to assume that he did not anticipate a financial scandal as he stepped into office.
Tibet & China
The Dalai Lama is an excellent proselytizer for Lamaism, a form of Buddhism--based on animism--indigenous to Tibet. In the case of His Holiness, admirers in the West seem willing to overlook the principles of separation of church and state. No doubt he is the religious leader of a majority (but not all) of the Tibetans. As a secular leader, he represents perhaps the 5% of the population that formerly belonged to the privileged ruling class. In his days, the other 95% were serfs and had no rights whatsoever. Today, China has invested heavily in the infrastructure and offered every Tibetan the opportunity to an education and the freedom to make a decent living by the dint of his/her own efforts. When Dalai Lama ruled Tibet, the average life expectancy was not even 36 years of age, now it’s 67; still less than China’s national average but far better than what it was. Today, Dalai Lama cannot legitimately champion the human rights of the Tibetan masses that had no rights when he was the titular ruler. I am planning to visit Tibet next year. Perhaps I will have more to say about this matter then.
At the beginning of my talk, I proposed raising a perspective about China different from the mainstream to stimulate your interest. I hope I have been provocative enough for this audience. I don’t know why it is that China is the favorite punching bag in the West--sometimes, I refer China as the go to piñata—but I believe this attitude is in for some adjustment. Let me quickly raise some other issues without elaboration to round out our topic.
• China has just put three astronauts in space along with a space walk and has plans to go to the moon. Heretofore, the U.S. has specifically excluded China from the space consortium membership that included Russia. Now NASA has been quietly meeting with China’s space officials about cooperation and leverage from technology that China has developed that NASA does not own. If we weren’t so darn sure that the Chinese needs to steal everything from us, we might have come to this realization sooner.
• China has steadfastly been buying U.S. treasury bills and agency notes and now owns close to $1 trillion of American debt. They have been buying even as Japan has been decreasing their holding for the very practical reason that the dollar is worth less and less. If you ask, the Treasury Department officials will privately admit to you that without China’s financial support, our economy would be in worse shape than it is.
• The Bush Administration made a hash of the relationship with North Korea. Without China’s assistance and leadership, the situation would be even more unstable than it is now.
• China built their Great Wall to keep foreigners out. They do not have the mentality or a history of conquering and occupying other countries. If that is the U.S. goal, China is unlikely to stand in the way. There is no need to regard China as an adversary so long we do not insist on their seeing everything our way.
• Just as China is rapidly becoming one of the most popular tourist destinations, China is also fast becoming the largest source of international tourists. Europeans will tell you that tourists from China are bigger spenders than Americans or Japanese. Until recently, we did not welcome tourists from China. This situation is changing to the potential benefit of our local economy.
• Just as China has become America’s largest source of foreign graduate students, China is also becoming a popular destination for foreign student. According to the most recent tally, China is the 6th most popular destination of the world for students going abroad. I hope some of you will take advantage study abroad opportunities to go to China and see for yourself. With more exchange of people will come improved mutual understanding and more acceptance of the other and different points of view and way of life. I believe this is important to the prospects of attaining world peace.
Now, I want to thank you for your attention and I welcome the opportunity to extend our discussion in any manner you, the audience would like. Please do allow me one small commercial. Much of what I presented today has been elaborated under various entries in my blog. I invite you to visit www.georgekoo.com and to share with others. I have also posted today’s speech on my blog if you wish to refer to anything I've said. Thank you.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
What America Needs to Know about China
.jpg)
The text of this speech will be posted after October 2, 2008.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Chen Shui Bian's Next to Last Strategy
A classic in Chinese culture is the collection known as the 36 strategies. One of the 36 is the so-called battered flesh (苦肉计, 'kurouji') strategy. The famous example of this strategy can be found in the Romance of the Three Kingdom, in which the greatly outnumbered Wu forces needed to persuade the superior Wei forces to adopt a losing battle plan. They accomplished the goal by sending a pretend defector to the Wei camp. To make the defection look real, the Wu commander had the defector beaten in front of eye witnesses on some trumped up charges. When the defector arrived in the opposing camp, the Wei generals had already heard about his mistreatment at the hands of Wu commander and welcomed him into their confidence. Thus when he suggested a battle plan desired by the Wu camp, it was accepted without suspicion.
It appears that in Taiwan, Chen Shui Bian is heading toward a kurouji of his own. In his case, his wife, Mme Wu, is being set up to carry this off. To date, she has pled frail health as the reason she has turned down at least 17 summons to appear in court and testify on her own defense regarding the illicit transfer of funds to overseas bank accounts. According to Chen, the wheelchair bound Mme Wu has recently fainted more than once, whenever she faced the prospects of having to appear.
The Taiwan authorities are less than sympathetic and threatened to force her to appear. Chen claims that such a forced appearance would surely kill her and thus setting the stage for the ultimate kurouji. In order for her to avoid having to explain to the investigators how she was able to wire transfer more than USD 20 million to Swiss bank accounts without the knowledge of her husband, she may really have to kill herself, or have someone do it for her.
Committing suicide, real or otherwise, would solve a lot of problems for Chen. Her real role in the Chen family money laundering schemes would remain in the dark. Just as the fortuitous assasination attempt on his tummy on election eve worked to his advantage four years ago, a grief strickened Chen would win him public sympathy--again--and possibly take the pressure off the ongoing investigation.
If the kuruoji does not free Chen from the corruption charges, there is always the most preferred of the 36 strategies. That strategy (走为上计) would be for Chen to get the hell out of Taiwan under the cover of darkness.
It appears that in Taiwan, Chen Shui Bian is heading toward a kurouji of his own. In his case, his wife, Mme Wu, is being set up to carry this off. To date, she has pled frail health as the reason she has turned down at least 17 summons to appear in court and testify on her own defense regarding the illicit transfer of funds to overseas bank accounts. According to Chen, the wheelchair bound Mme Wu has recently fainted more than once, whenever she faced the prospects of having to appear.
The Taiwan authorities are less than sympathetic and threatened to force her to appear. Chen claims that such a forced appearance would surely kill her and thus setting the stage for the ultimate kurouji. In order for her to avoid having to explain to the investigators how she was able to wire transfer more than USD 20 million to Swiss bank accounts without the knowledge of her husband, she may really have to kill herself, or have someone do it for her.
Committing suicide, real or otherwise, would solve a lot of problems for Chen. Her real role in the Chen family money laundering schemes would remain in the dark. Just as the fortuitous assasination attempt on his tummy on election eve worked to his advantage four years ago, a grief strickened Chen would win him public sympathy--again--and possibly take the pressure off the ongoing investigation.
If the kuruoji does not free Chen from the corruption charges, there is always the most preferred of the 36 strategies. That strategy (走为上计) would be for Chen to get the hell out of Taiwan under the cover of darkness.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
If I were Chen Shui Bian's daughter....
This is the email letter I would write:
Dear Sir/Madam,
I desperately need your assistance to access funds from secret Swiss bank accounts.
You see my father was the former president of Taiwan. Now that he is out of the office, his enemies are persecuting him and hounding him about alleged financial misconduct. The current government is investigating charges that my father illegally laundered at least $31 million to overseas accounts. My father has angrily denied these charges. He will only admit that my mother transferred $20 million to Swiss bank accounts under my sister-in-law's name, but without his knowledge. Of course, every penny of the $20 million are legitimately his, given to him from his multitude of admirers.
Now, my father, mother, brother and others in the immediate family are not allowed to leave Taiwan. Therefore we have no way to access the funds abroad. We need the funds for a variety of reasons. In part for his legal defense, even though he has been very skillful in rallying public opinion to his side. But just in case we need to make a fast get away, the under cover run will be costly and we would need the funds immediately. There is even a chance that my father will run for president again in 2012 and regain the immunity (and impunity) that he once enjoyed. If he does, his old donors may not rush to his aid unless he can show he already has the funds to make a serious attempt.
The shabby treatment of my father knows no limit. There is even a movement to reexamine the assasination attempt on the election eve in 2004, which the accusers claim my father staged to get some last minute sympathy votes. You may know that my father was seriously grazed by the assassin bullet which also wounded vice president Annette Lu on the knee. Fortunately for her, the momemtum of the bullet had been mostly dissipated by the fat of my father's belly. But as you can see, my father's enemies will go to any length to get him.
So please, I need your assistance to withdraw the funds that belong to my family. If you agree to help me, I can promise you a fee of 20% of the millions you help us recover and in any case not less than USD$10 million. If you are interested, please contact me at your earliest convenience.
============================================
The letter is, of course, tongue-in-cheek. For a good recent summary of the scandal surrounding Chen, please go here.
Dear Sir/Madam,
I desperately need your assistance to access funds from secret Swiss bank accounts.
You see my father was the former president of Taiwan. Now that he is out of the office, his enemies are persecuting him and hounding him about alleged financial misconduct. The current government is investigating charges that my father illegally laundered at least $31 million to overseas accounts. My father has angrily denied these charges. He will only admit that my mother transferred $20 million to Swiss bank accounts under my sister-in-law's name, but without his knowledge. Of course, every penny of the $20 million are legitimately his, given to him from his multitude of admirers.
Now, my father, mother, brother and others in the immediate family are not allowed to leave Taiwan. Therefore we have no way to access the funds abroad. We need the funds for a variety of reasons. In part for his legal defense, even though he has been very skillful in rallying public opinion to his side. But just in case we need to make a fast get away, the under cover run will be costly and we would need the funds immediately. There is even a chance that my father will run for president again in 2012 and regain the immunity (and impunity) that he once enjoyed. If he does, his old donors may not rush to his aid unless he can show he already has the funds to make a serious attempt.
The shabby treatment of my father knows no limit. There is even a movement to reexamine the assasination attempt on the election eve in 2004, which the accusers claim my father staged to get some last minute sympathy votes. You may know that my father was seriously grazed by the assassin bullet which also wounded vice president Annette Lu on the knee. Fortunately for her, the momemtum of the bullet had been mostly dissipated by the fat of my father's belly. But as you can see, my father's enemies will go to any length to get him.
So please, I need your assistance to withdraw the funds that belong to my family. If you agree to help me, I can promise you a fee of 20% of the millions you help us recover and in any case not less than USD$10 million. If you are interested, please contact me at your earliest convenience.
============================================
The letter is, of course, tongue-in-cheek. For a good recent summary of the scandal surrounding Chen, please go here.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Japan has a funny way of promoting cross straits unity
Last week, a Japanese frigate, Koshiki, on patrol collided with Lien Ho, a deep sea sports fishing boat from Taiwan, an incident that was virtually ignored by the media in the West. Yet future developments from this provocation will bear close watching.
The incident took place in the disputed waters of a cluster of 8 uninhabited islands that China and Taiwan claimed as part of Taiwan called Diaoyu islands. Japan claimed the same islands, which they called Senkaku as part of Okinawa.
According to the Japanese coast guard on patrol, while they were in the process of establishing the identity of the fishing boat, the boat began to take an evasive course and ran into the frigate; apparently it zigged when it should have zagged.
According to the Taiwanese crew, the Japanese frigate found them in their search light, hailed them and then suddenly steered the much heavier ship into the fore section of the fishing boat causing a huge gash and sank the boat in one hour.
Lien Ho’s crew of 3 and its 13 customers were fished from the waters by Koshiki and taken to Ishigaki, the southernmost island of the Ryukyus. The sports fishermen were shortly released, then the crew of 2 and lastly the captain of the boat.
The crew upon their return asserted that their Japanese captors used harsh, sleep deprived interrogation techniques and demanded that they sign confessions in Japanese that they did not comprehend.
The captain maintained that the frigate deliberately rammed his boat. The captain made his living by taking deep sea fishing enthusiasts to these islands and has never heretofore encountered the Japanese Navy.
The Diaoyu islands have been a periodic focus of vigorous dispute between China, the Chinese Diaspora and Japan ever since the U.S. turned Okinawa back to Japan in 1972. Then as now, China and Taiwan were separate entities. Though both contend that Diaoyu islands were connected to Taiwan and not Okinawa, their divided voices did not have the international clout of Japan, already considered an ally of the U.S.
It remained for the Chinese Diaspora to carry on the argument with Japan, most notably from Hong Kong and from the San Francisco Bay Area. Hong Kong still remembers David Chan, one of the activist leaders, who tragically drowned while attempting to swim to one of the islands in 1996.
Japan claimed administrative control over the islands when the U.S. returned Okinawa to Japan. All the Chinese in the world have responded that the islands were administered as part of Taiwan dating back to the Qing dynasty and were ceded to Japan in the unequal treaty of 1895. When Taiwan reverted to China in 1945, the Diaoyu islands should have been part of the package except the U.S. was still holding onto them.
This latest incident raises some disturbing questions about Japan’s motives. Did Fukuda’s government ordered this provocation or was it an initiative of a lower ranking official?
Was it Japan’s intention to test the resolve of the newly elected president of Taiwan, Ma Ying-jeou? Harvard educated Ma in his youth was a prominent activist for the return of the Diaoyu islands to Taiwan. He even wrote a thesis on this subject.
To complicate matters, Taiwan’s resident envoy in Tokyo was recalled in part to show Taiwan government’s displeasure with Japan and in part to express their dissatisfaction with the envoy for being “soft” with Tokyo. The envoy, an appointee of Ma’s predecessor Chen Shui-bian, has since resigned.
In a show of bravado, the Taiwan navy cutters have escorted some protest ships to the Diaoyu islands to stake their claim in response to the ramming incident. Some of the emotional responses from Taiwan even suggested going to war with Japan. They pointed out that Russia and South Korea have been successful in resolving their disputes with Japan by forceful possession of the islands in dispute.
Realistically, Taiwan does not have the navy to take on Japan. Some Bay Area Chinese have asked why Beijing has not been more active in the dispute. Understandably, since Taiwan has not yet returned to China’s fold, Beijing is in the awkward position of having to defer to Taiwan’s lead.
However, Taiwan and China has just concluded the first successful bi-lateral meeting where both parties agreed to begin weekend direct flights carrying up to 3000 passengers daily across the straits in each direction. This is herald as the first step to significant warming of relations across the straits. See O'Neill for a comprehensive analysis to date.
By becoming the adversary of an issue that both Taiwan and China find emotional common ground, the ultimate irony is for Japan to be the catalyst pushing the two sides to even speedier and closer cooperation.
See edited version in New America Media.
The incident took place in the disputed waters of a cluster of 8 uninhabited islands that China and Taiwan claimed as part of Taiwan called Diaoyu islands. Japan claimed the same islands, which they called Senkaku as part of Okinawa.
According to the Japanese coast guard on patrol, while they were in the process of establishing the identity of the fishing boat, the boat began to take an evasive course and ran into the frigate; apparently it zigged when it should have zagged.
According to the Taiwanese crew, the Japanese frigate found them in their search light, hailed them and then suddenly steered the much heavier ship into the fore section of the fishing boat causing a huge gash and sank the boat in one hour.
Lien Ho’s crew of 3 and its 13 customers were fished from the waters by Koshiki and taken to Ishigaki, the southernmost island of the Ryukyus. The sports fishermen were shortly released, then the crew of 2 and lastly the captain of the boat.
The crew upon their return asserted that their Japanese captors used harsh, sleep deprived interrogation techniques and demanded that they sign confessions in Japanese that they did not comprehend.
The captain maintained that the frigate deliberately rammed his boat. The captain made his living by taking deep sea fishing enthusiasts to these islands and has never heretofore encountered the Japanese Navy.
The Diaoyu islands have been a periodic focus of vigorous dispute between China, the Chinese Diaspora and Japan ever since the U.S. turned Okinawa back to Japan in 1972. Then as now, China and Taiwan were separate entities. Though both contend that Diaoyu islands were connected to Taiwan and not Okinawa, their divided voices did not have the international clout of Japan, already considered an ally of the U.S.
It remained for the Chinese Diaspora to carry on the argument with Japan, most notably from Hong Kong and from the San Francisco Bay Area. Hong Kong still remembers David Chan, one of the activist leaders, who tragically drowned while attempting to swim to one of the islands in 1996.
Japan claimed administrative control over the islands when the U.S. returned Okinawa to Japan. All the Chinese in the world have responded that the islands were administered as part of Taiwan dating back to the Qing dynasty and were ceded to Japan in the unequal treaty of 1895. When Taiwan reverted to China in 1945, the Diaoyu islands should have been part of the package except the U.S. was still holding onto them.
This latest incident raises some disturbing questions about Japan’s motives. Did Fukuda’s government ordered this provocation or was it an initiative of a lower ranking official?
Was it Japan’s intention to test the resolve of the newly elected president of Taiwan, Ma Ying-jeou? Harvard educated Ma in his youth was a prominent activist for the return of the Diaoyu islands to Taiwan. He even wrote a thesis on this subject.
To complicate matters, Taiwan’s resident envoy in Tokyo was recalled in part to show Taiwan government’s displeasure with Japan and in part to express their dissatisfaction with the envoy for being “soft” with Tokyo. The envoy, an appointee of Ma’s predecessor Chen Shui-bian, has since resigned.
In a show of bravado, the Taiwan navy cutters have escorted some protest ships to the Diaoyu islands to stake their claim in response to the ramming incident. Some of the emotional responses from Taiwan even suggested going to war with Japan. They pointed out that Russia and South Korea have been successful in resolving their disputes with Japan by forceful possession of the islands in dispute.
Realistically, Taiwan does not have the navy to take on Japan. Some Bay Area Chinese have asked why Beijing has not been more active in the dispute. Understandably, since Taiwan has not yet returned to China’s fold, Beijing is in the awkward position of having to defer to Taiwan’s lead.
However, Taiwan and China has just concluded the first successful bi-lateral meeting where both parties agreed to begin weekend direct flights carrying up to 3000 passengers daily across the straits in each direction. This is herald as the first step to significant warming of relations across the straits. See O'Neill for a comprehensive analysis to date.
By becoming the adversary of an issue that both Taiwan and China find emotional common ground, the ultimate irony is for Japan to be the catalyst pushing the two sides to even speedier and closer cooperation.
See edited version in New America Media.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Significance of Ma Yingjeou's Win in Taiwan Election
Ma Yingjeou scored an overwhelming win in the just concluded election for president of Taiwan, garnering 58% of the votes cast, and handily defeated his opponent by more than 2 million votes. His win has been a subject of all sorts of interpretations by outside pundits.
Seemingly overlooked in the post-mortem analysis is his win on Kinmen Island, where he won 95% of the votes. Kinmen is the smallest of Taiwan's voting districts and easy to overlook. But surely, a plurality of 95% is noteworthy and deserves a closer examination.
Kinmen (also known as Quemoy or Jinmen) is just one mile off the coast of Xiamen. Direct ferry service to Xiamen began in 2001 and the traffic between the offshore island and its bigger neighbor has flourished, having expanded to eight daily sailing in each direction.
Xiamen is where residents of Kinmen go to buy necessities, fresh fruits and vegetables and luxury goods. Kinmen is a popular destination for tourists from the mainland. The economic linkage is obvious and palpable to people on both sides of ferry crossing.
Ma’s avalanche victory on Kinmen is a leading indicator of where his cross strait policy needs to go when he is sworn into office on May 20.
The people of Kinmen can see first-hand the benefits of closer ties to the mainland and bet on Ma to improve on this approach. The rest of the people of Taiwan will also see the economic benefit if Ma delivers on his campaign promise for closer economic ties with China.
Closer economic ties will build on the natural affinity of people of both sides and lead to closer ties with the mainland, something Ma’s opponent did not relish. Hopefully Ma will ride the rising tide of sentiments and make the necessary bold moves to reverse the past eight years of stagnation and cross strait hostility.
He has made a positive move by revisiting the prospects of welcoming pandas to Taiwan earlier offered by Beijing but rejected by his predecessor, Chen Shui Bian.
If he let irrelevant issues such as pursuit of pseudo independence, maintaining checkbook diplomacy with banana republics, buying arms from the U.S., denying Taiwan’s Chinese roots, rewriting history books, and, of course, graft and corruption interfere with implementing the people’s demand, he will rue his day and the lost opportunity.
His first 100 days will be watched intently.
Seemingly overlooked in the post-mortem analysis is his win on Kinmen Island, where he won 95% of the votes. Kinmen is the smallest of Taiwan's voting districts and easy to overlook. But surely, a plurality of 95% is noteworthy and deserves a closer examination.
Kinmen (also known as Quemoy or Jinmen) is just one mile off the coast of Xiamen. Direct ferry service to Xiamen began in 2001 and the traffic between the offshore island and its bigger neighbor has flourished, having expanded to eight daily sailing in each direction.
Xiamen is where residents of Kinmen go to buy necessities, fresh fruits and vegetables and luxury goods. Kinmen is a popular destination for tourists from the mainland. The economic linkage is obvious and palpable to people on both sides of ferry crossing.
Ma’s avalanche victory on Kinmen is a leading indicator of where his cross strait policy needs to go when he is sworn into office on May 20.
The people of Kinmen can see first-hand the benefits of closer ties to the mainland and bet on Ma to improve on this approach. The rest of the people of Taiwan will also see the economic benefit if Ma delivers on his campaign promise for closer economic ties with China.
Closer economic ties will build on the natural affinity of people of both sides and lead to closer ties with the mainland, something Ma’s opponent did not relish. Hopefully Ma will ride the rising tide of sentiments and make the necessary bold moves to reverse the past eight years of stagnation and cross strait hostility.
He has made a positive move by revisiting the prospects of welcoming pandas to Taiwan earlier offered by Beijing but rejected by his predecessor, Chen Shui Bian.
If he let irrelevant issues such as pursuit of pseudo independence, maintaining checkbook diplomacy with banana republics, buying arms from the U.S., denying Taiwan’s Chinese roots, rewriting history books, and, of course, graft and corruption interfere with implementing the people’s demand, he will rue his day and the lost opportunity.
His first 100 days will be watched intently.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)