Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: Who cares what the ICG says?

There has been more evidence this week of the inability of President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) administration to focus the public's attention on the things that really matter.

Speaking to Belgian parliamentarians on Wednesday, Chen expressed disappointment at the International Crisis Group (ICG), a self-styled independent, non-profit, non-governmental think tank, for changing its "representation" of Taiwan and forging closer links with China, including establishing an office in Beijing.

ICG director of media relations Andrew Stroehlein refused to confirm or deny Chen's claims when contacted by the Taipei Times, saying that the matter was sensitive, but he did cite a need for "balance in our representation" between Taiwan and China, whatever that means.

A careful survey of the ICG Web site and many of its documents fails to convince that this organization has done anything like what it promises: prevent conflict. But that's not as important a point as the fact that the ICG does not necessarily stand for the protection of democracy, especially not by force.

The ICG can make changes if it wishes to. Let it use the title "Taiwan, province of the People's Republic of China" if it so desires. But Taiwan's claim to self-determination and defense of its democracy will suffer no damage from an organization that claims to be independent of government but has taken money from governments (including Taiwan) and is stacked with former politicians.

The real question is why Chen or anyone else should be concerned about what this organization does or says, especially on the eve of something as important as Chinese President Hu Jintao's (胡錦濤) visit to the US.

Part of the answer may be that until last year, Minister of Foreign Affairs James Huang (黃志芳) was a member of the ICG board -- even as he served as the Presidential Office's deputy secretary-general. A fat lot of good his membership and taxpayer money donated to the ICG seems to have brought Taiwan, which only goes to show that "dollar diplomacy" can be just as farcical in the think tank community as between governments. Groucho Marx's words ring very true in the case of government officials and "independent" think tanks: You should never join an organization that would have you as a member.

But instead of tactfully deferring comment on this minor episode, Chen brought it up with the Belgians, including one who formerly belonged to the ICG, thus turning a minor, private embarrassment for the government into a public one.

Meanwhile, in the real world, things are looking worrying for Chen on two fronts. On Tuesday, Taiwan's de facto ambassador to Washington David Lee (李大維) warned that there may be nasty surprises in store when Hu meets US President George W. Bush next week. In saying this, Lee is possibly suggesting that the US government reserves the right to surprise Taiwan with its cross-strait policy, even as it criticizes Chen for not keeping Washington briefed on his domestic activities. Worse, Lee may have been briefed by the US that Taiwanese sacrifices are due.

And in China, former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Lien Chan (連戰) is upstaging his successor and doing his best to paint Taiwanese as people who value cash above freedom and democracy -- music to the ears of the Chinese Communist Party, Chinese nationalists everywhere and anyone else who cannot see beyond their next paycheck.

Chen has more or less played down the Hu visit, and therefore possibly underestimates its damaging potential. And he waited until yesterday before criticizing Lien with any force on his latest pilgrimage to Beijing. If only he had spent more time on these matters than the petty intrigues of the ICG.
This story has been viewed 1455 times.