Sun, Nov 03, 2002 page8

• Naval manoeuvres send out ripples

  • By the Liberty Times editorial
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Minister of National Defense Tang Yao-ming (湯曜明) indicated on Tuesday that a Chinese Luhu-class missile destroyer sailed near Taiwan's eastern coast on its way to a naval exercise in the South China Sea. An investigation by the Liberty Times revealed that the destroyer had come within 100 nautical miles of the east coast of Taiwan while at the same time dispatching smaller vessels to rendezvous with the Chinese fleet for an annual exercise. Irrespective of the purpose of the naval exercise, the destroyer represented a potential threat to Taiwan.

  However, when Minister Tang issued the warning, the opposition camp did not react as it ought to have. The pan-blues in particular thought nothing of it and showed no sign of urgency when they reviewed the budget for arm procurements. Instead, with a total disregard for Taiwan's security, they squealed about the so-called "one China" principle and the three cross-strait direct links. They sought to handover Taiwan's economic lifeline into the hands of China and repeatedly engaged in talks designed to undermine the national sovereignty of Taiwan. One cannot help but feel skeptical about which country they owe their loyalty to?

  A few days ago, PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) said that he would be willing to visit China on behalf of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and push for cross-strait peace and trade under the "one China" framework. The KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) also responded in unison, asking President Chen to face up to the "one China" issue. Both Lien and Soong ran in the last presidential election and ought to know that this country possesses independent sovereignty separate from the PRC. Yet they repeatedly demand that the government accepts the "one China" consensus and even consider going to China to discuss it. By doing so, they are essentially denying the sovereignty of this country. Does this mean that they think they were running for the chief executive position of a Chinese Special Administrative Region (SAR) two years ago?

  The KMT and the PFP often criticize the government for running the country on political ideologies, and for its unwillingness to further open up investment in China and cross-strait direct links. Their criticisms expose their shortcoming. The cautious attitude of the government is not a demonstration of ideology but a reflection of its compliance with mainstream opinion. Besides, from their criticisms, everyone can tell that those caught in the quicksand of political ideologies are precisely those who insist on throwing open the doors of investment and accepting the "one China" policy at any cost. If they hold Taiwan and the mutual interests of its 23 million inhabitants close to their hearts, how can they blindly lean toward China? When they were in power, these individuals loudly called out anti-communism and patriotic slogans. Yet now they take an entirely opposite view and join forces with the communists in selling out Taiwan. What do they have to say to the people of Taiwan?

  Last week, an official with China's foreign affairs ministry reiterated that in negotiating over the pragmatic and mechanical aspects of the three links, the political definition of "one China" may be left out. However, this does not mean that cross-strait direct links can be described as links between two countries, the official said. As for the so-called cross-strait links, they must be operated by registered businesses on the two sides of Taiwan Strait, the official added. This essentially puts the three direct links under the catagory of "domestic affairs." Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen (錢其琛) has already made this position of China very clear.

  Simply put, it doesn't matter whether the links are called "cross-strait links" or "three cross-strait direct links," the links will be treated in accordance with the "one China" principle, although there will be no mentioning of the principle itself. If both sides of the Taiwan Strait do not negotiate as two countries, they become one country in the eyes of the international community. The pan-blue camp knows only too well the underlying implications and significance. Yet it continues to push for direct links, and special direct links by charter plans. One cannot even begin to guess what its motives may be.

  Soong indicated that there is nothing the opposition can do, since all the decision-making responsibility rests with the ruling party. Ironically, while this may be the case with all other mature democracies, this is not the case in Taiwan. Since it lost the elections, the pan-blue opposition camp hasn't been able to accept defeat.

  Before last year's legislative election, the pan-blues enjoyed a strong legislative majority. Even though this is not the case any more, they are still fully capable of hurting the government. They now threaten to push through the direct-links legislation and force the government to agree to special links by chartered plans. Moreover, Beijing enjoys a good relationship with the pan-blue camp, despite its refusal to negotiate with the Taiwan government. The pan-blues have been collaborating with Beijing in pressuring the Taiwan government from both inside and out. How can they call themselves powerless?

  For the past two years Taiwan's economy has not been performing well. Facing industry decline, economic recession, and high unemployment rates, the proper response is to think of ways to revive the economy at home. However, while the government's economic policies may be less than ideal, the pan-blue camp is doing worse -- it is mistaking a lethal poison for a wonder drug. It predicts that industries will die if they don't go to China, that the three direct links are the only way to save Taiwan, and that China is the only hope for Taiwan. At the same time the pan-blues are putting pressure on the government to succumb to their way of thinking.

  The so-called "active opening" policy was the product of their pressure, although it will only speed up capital outflows and the industry exodus. On the issue of the three direct links they are pressuring the government with the help of China, disregarding the fact that the opening up of such links will see the collapse of Taiwan's economy.

  Many problems in Taiwan have roots in some individuals' confused national identity and the failure to examine Taiwan's economic future from a "Taiwan first" perspective. These two shortcomings reinforce each other, aggravating the problems in Taiwan's political and economic developments. Making investments based on a "Taiwan first" ideal and strengthening national identity should supplement and reinforce each other.

  The Taiwan government is gradually beginning to see the threats posed to people's sense of national identity by the "active opening" policy. It has therefore taken on a new direction in which emphasis is on "Taiwan first" investments, revival of home industries, and improvement of competitiveness. These are effective ways to counter Chinese threats. In contrast, the conduct of the pan-blues will not only handover Taiwan's economic lifeline to China, but also sell out Taiwan's sovereignty from this side of the Taiwan Strait.

  It does not require much imagination to figure out the intentions behind the recent movements of the Chinese fleet. If Taiwan continues to cave into Chinese demands for opening up investments in China, direct links, and the "one China" issue, Taiwan faces becoming China's prey.

  The example of Hong Kong is truly alarming. The industries of the SAR have been uprooted and relocated to north on a massive scale. The unemployment rate of Hong Kong has reached 8 percent as the real-estate market suffers from serious declines and the inflation problem worsens.

  So, despite all the arguments waged by the pan-blue, the people of Taiwan should keep a cool head. If opening up investment, direct links, and "one China" are really wonder drugs for Taiwan's problems, shouldn't the pan-blue have used these cures when they were in power?
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Bologna advance to face AC Milan in Coppa final

  • 2

    Bukele proposes prisoner swap with Maduro

  • 3

    Wild’s top line too much for Vegas Golden Knights

  • 4

    HK, Macau residency rules tightened

  • 5

    Eric Chu, 2 others to be questioned for leading illegal assembly last week