As former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega’s fortunes fluctuated with the whims of the US government, it is apt that reports of his death on Tuesday focused on his blow-hot-and-cold relationship with Washington.
What is not so well-known, even here in Taiwan, is the role Taipei played in the relationship. Chinese-language media in Taiwan alluded to the training and assistance Noriega received in Taipei, but these were generally fleeting references.
A fuller picture provides a fascinating insight into the then-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government’s nefarious activities in Central America during the 1980s.
Noriega was a keen student of subjects ranging from the exotic to the mundane: Archive administration and jungle warfare were among the courses he took at training facilities around the world, most notably the notorious School of the Americas — now the The Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation.
He also took classes in media manipulation at Fort Bragg where he rubbed shoulders with Taiwanese, Iranians and fellow Latin Americans.
Military academic Thomas Marks — who has glossed over some of the most egregious KMT abuses — contends that Noriega was not among the many Panamanian officers and civilian leaders who graduated from the notorious political warfare program at Fu Hsing Kang College.
However, old “pineapple face” certainly received some kind of instruction during his early visits to Taiwan.
Elsewhere, Frederick Kempe, president and chief executive officer of the Atlantic Council think tank, has described Noriega’s enrollment in courses offered by Taiwan and Israel, which along with South Africa formed a pariah triumvirate. These nations could be depended on by Washington for proxy operations that circumvented congressional oversight.
Kempe said that Noriega — who had once entertained aspirations of being a psychiatrist — was particularly interested in psychological warfare, a known component of the Fu Hsing Kang syllabus.
In Taiwan, Kempe said, Noriega participated in “police investigative courses,” a description that sounds strikingly close to what was on offer at Fu Hsing Kang, Marks’ insistence to the contrary notwithstanding.
The late Nancy Bernkopf Tucker, an authority on US relations with Taiwan and China, confirmed that Noriega underwent “military and intelligence training” in Taipei early in his career.
Whatever it was he was learning, Noriega cultivated a steadfast friendship with Admiral Sung Chang-chih (宋長志), who, in his positions as chief of general staff and subsequently minister of national defense, was to prove an invaluable ally just when Noriega needed one.
With the US shoulder starting to freeze, Sung was appointed ambassador to Panama in 1987, a role which saw him involved in what Tucker refers to as “clandestine enterprises” aimed at undermining Beijing.
Once again, Marks emerges as the KMT’s ablest apologist, insisting that Sung was dispatched to reason with his old drinking buddy, rather than abet him in any skullduggery.
Marks’ proof for this claim comes straight from the horse’s mouth.
“I told him he was in a very dangerous situation ... that he could not alienate the US,” Sung told Marks. “If General Noriega had accepted my ideas, things could have worked out better.”
Far from condoning Noriega’s behavior, Marks says, the KMT government was trying to rein him in. The orders came from then-president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) with Sung casting himself as a reluctant errand boy.
“I didn’t want to, but our diplomatic situation was so sensitive that I had to go,” Sung said.
Worse still, “I didn’t make a penny,” Sung lamented.
This holier-than-thou version of events is unconvincing.
Taipei’s ignominious bit-part in the Iran-Contra scandal is now well documented.
Yet before an alternative method of funneling funds to the Contras in Nicaragua was agreed, Noriega was put forward as a potential intermediary in late 1984. The plan eventually collapsed, but it was far from the end of Taipei’s illicit dealings with Noriega.
With Washington angling behind the scenes for Noriega’s resignation in 1988, Taiwan was again approached to supply the bribe money required to ensure he took the fall.
While the ruse also fell through, Washington’s official break with Noriega left a gap for Taipei to ratchet up weapons sales to Panama.
A US$1 billion “development” fund saw its way to state coffers the following year, with Noriega’s adviser, Mario Rognoni, saying: “The Taiwanese were the ringleaders of those helping us. The others followed.”
The death of this brutal dictator should serve as a stark reminder of the depths to which Taiwan was once prepared to descend in its bid for international recognition.
James Baron is a freelance writer and journalist based in Taipei.
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS