20040327
=======
Kick Japan on March 27, 2004 ……
Japan holds PRC island activists
STRAINED RELATIONS: The territorial clash over the Senkaku/Diaoyutai islands worsened when Japan arrested seven Chinese for illegal entry
AP AND REUTERS , TOKYO
Japan tightened its cordon of boats yesterday around a set of remote islands also claimed by China, blocking any new visits by activists that would inflame the dispute, while Beijing demanded that Tokyo release seven Chinese who landed on the isles this week.
Japanese police late yesterday said they would hand the activists over to immigration authorities, Japanese media said.
Immigration officials were likely to deport the activists, government sources had said earlier.
Japan's detention on Wednesday of the activists was the first such arrests in the international dispute over the archipelago known as Diaoyu in China and Senkaku in Japan. The islands are also claimed by Taiwan.
The incident further aggravates relations between Tokyo and Beijing, already tense over Japanese leader Junichiro Koizumi's annual visits to a war shrine, which Asian nations say glorifies Japan's militaristic past.
In China, state-run newspapers earlier yesterday trumpeted demands that Japan release the activists. About 50 protesters congregated outside the Japanese Embassy in Beijing, holding up banners claiming the islands as Chinese territory.
Japanese Coast Guard spokesman Masayoshi Iramina said vessels guarding the uninhabited islands were on heightened alert, but refused to say how many more ships had been added to regular patrols.
Japanese authorities had questioned the seven Chinese activists arrested for their allegedly illegal visit to the isle of Uotsuri.
The China Federation for Defending the Diaoyu Islands, which sent the first batch of activists, said it planned another trip to the island on Sunday with more than 30 people.
Japan's National Public Safety Commission chief, Kiyoko Ono, said the Chinese activists violated immigration laws and stressed that authorities would prevent any others, including Japanese, from reaching the island.
On Thursday, police stopped a Japanese right-wing extremist group from leaving for the island from nearby Okinawa.
"Our government disapproves of landings by Japanese," Ono said. "It goes without saying that we will reject foreign visitors, too."
Japan took control of the islands, located between Taiwan and Japan, when it defeated China in the 1895 Sino-Japanese war. The US had jurisdiction over them after WWII until 1972, when they were handed back to Japan. China says its claim dates back centuries.
Tokyo and Beijing have issued
competing claims of ownership over the island. On Thursday, Beijing called the
arrests "a challenge to Chinese sovereignty." Tokyo said the
activists trespassed on Japanese land despite warnings to stay away.
The Chinese activists left the southeastern province of Zhejiang on a trawler on Wednesday, and reached the disputed island aboard smaller boats. The activists said they wanted to draw attention to China's claim over the island chain.
China had demanded Thursday that Japan release the activists "without any conditions."
Meanwhile, protesters in Beijing and Hong Kong denounced the arrests and burned Japanese flags, prompting a strong protest from Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi, who is to visit China from April 3.
"The flag-burning was extremely regrettable," Kawaguchi said.
Koizumi has said he hoped the diplomatic repercussions of the incident would be limited.
Japanese media said the dispute was more than just symbolic.
"The Senkaku islands aren't just about who owns these uninhabited islands. The area surrounding the islands is of extreme strategic importance because there are probably untapped oil resources," the national Asahi newspaper said in an editorial yesterday.
A Chinese protester delivers a flying kick to a passing embassy car
during a demonstration outside the Japanese embassy in Beijing yesterday.
-----------------------------------------
On March 27, 2004 ……
Advertising Shooting was clearly a hoax
Deborah Liu, California
The assassination attempt is filled with inconsistencies and flaws if one looks at it step by step. The claim is that Chen, while standing in a moving jeep rallying a crowd, was shot in the stomach by a bullet through the front windshield. The same bullet then struck Lu, who was standing to the right of Chen [from the perspective of cameras in front of the jeep], on the knee.
Let's break this chain of actions down by following the movement of the bullet: A bullet shot from the attacker's rifle broke through the front windshield of the jeep and hit Chen's stomach. The same bullet then made a right turn, cut across Chen's stomach and hit Lu on her right knee. Unless this bullet is remote controlled, I do not see how any bullet can make turns at will.
Several inconsistencies are also revealed
through the surveillance camera in the hospital that Chen and Lu were rushed
to. First, Chen and Lu were seen walking into the hospital minutes after
being shot. The key word here is walking. If I had just been shot in the
stomach or in the knee, I would at least be slightly crouched and limping. But
no, the camera reveals they were both walking normally.
Second, if my country's president and vice president had just been shot in an assassination attempt, they would be rolled into the hospital on a stretcher or in a wheelchair or at least on [crutches]. But no, they walked in normally like all the other people around them.
That same night, after winning the election, they both appeared on TV cheering, clapping, raising their arms high in victory gestures, walking about rallying the crowd and giving bows to their supporters.
Let's use our common sense here. This chain of events all happened within one day. If any one of us had just been shot in our stomach or knee that afternoon, we would not have the capability to perform the above physical movements.
Yes, Chen and Lu have won the election, but the Taiwanese people have lost. They have voted for a man that has and will continue to use their naivete and trust for his own agenda. The independence that Chen promised them will never come to pass.
-----------------------------------------
On March 27, 2004 ……
Stop the conspiracy drivel
John Diedrichs, Taipei
The controversy over [the March 19 shooting of President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu] is both depressing and bemusing. It's depressing because it seems fueled by an almost "ethnic" distrust between the pan-blue and pan-green camps. It's bemusing because the "conspiracy theory" behind it is so ridiculously implausible.
Consider the problem of how to "stage" an assassination attempt.
A few minutes of thought is enough to reveal a dozen ways to do it more convincingly than what actually happened. The most obvious flaw is Chen's wound. It strains credulity that anyone trying to fake a wound would make a 15cm gash instead of a 9mm hole.
For that matter, why bother injuring yourself? If you want to fake a shooting, just wait until after the parade and put a couple of bullet holes in the jeep (put them in the inside panels, out of view from the cameras). Then the next day you can "discover" the bullet holes and notify the press.
[On the evening of March 20], after the elections, I sat with friends discussing these events, and between us, we worked out an explanation for the shooting which satisfied the known facts.
We did this because we simply couldn't believe that anyone deliberately trying to "stage" an assassination could possibly have come up with the [March 19] scenario. On Sunday, the Criminal Investigation Bureau announced the exact same explanation.
The shooter was on the right side as the jeep went past and he or she got off two shots. The first was from a frontal angle and went through the windshield. Because of the shallow angle between the path of the bullet and the plane of the windshield, the compressive resistance of the glass sheet came into play (imagine the difference between jumping through a plate glass window and falling on a "knife-edge" of glass). This was enough to divert the bullet down and to the right, toward Lu's knee.
Knowing he or she had missed with the first shot, and having only a few more seconds of opportunity, the shooter waited until Chen was directly in front of him or her for the second shot. And if he or she had aimed just [a few centimeters] to the left -- a matter of a few degrees of angle, at that range -- Taiwan might well have witnessed its first successful assassination.
Scientists can determine, from the shape of the hole and the characteristics of the glass, the most likely trajectory of the bullet.
This information, coupled with copious videotape of the event, will in time yield many clues about the case.
The pan-blue camp may nitpick over details of the ballot recount (though, for my part, I can't understand their objection to amending the election laws to codify the criteria for recounts). But it's time to put this absurd "conspiracy theory" about the shooting to rest.
-----------------------------------------
On March 27, 2004 ……
Pan-blues dislike democracy
Toby Wilsdon, Taipei
In regard to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-People First Party (PFP) alliance's reaction to the election result, it is worth noting elections in other countries and the light that these cast on the KMT's understanding of democracy.
The most recent comparison is to the general election in Spain in the wake of the Madrid bombing. Hundreds of people were killed or injured in Madrid three days before a general election which the pro-Iraq war government, led by the Popular Party, was expected to win. After the bombing it didn't turn out like that. That is simply the way it is; people voted as they saw fit.
Similarly, Israel lost a strong and trusted leader working for peace when former Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated in November 1995. Shimon Peres, seen as too "dovish," and without the military experience of the former general Rabin, took over the leadership of the Labor Party and became prime minister. Six months later he lost a general election that Rabin may well have won. Labor lost power in part because Rabin was shot (and his successor didn't carry the same trust).
It is neither fair nor unfair to the parties involved -- just unlucky for the loser that "events, dear boy" (in the words of former British prime minister Harold Macmillan) turned against them.
There are many variables in democratic elections, some of which are beyond the control of the participants. The participants simply have to accept the results. In the absence of evidence that Chen either had himself shot or faked it -- a somewhat outrageous suggestion -- any effect the assassination attempt had must simply be accepted. Perhaps the pan-blues will have better luck next time.
The reaction of former US vice president Al Gore to the 2000 election in the US is a worthy case study. Gore rightly challenged the result and a tortuously long battle was entered into. He had a strong legal and moral case until the end, particularly given the manipulation of the Florida courts by Florida Governor Jeb Bush's administration, but when the US Supreme Court ultimately ruled against him, Gore conceded with dignity, saying that he believed its decision was wrong but he had reached the end of the road and respected the due process of the law.
A further comparison can be made regarding disputed election results in Winchester in the UK general election of 1997, which saw the Labour Party swept to power in a landslide. Winchester had been a "true-blue" Conservative parliamentary constituency for as long as anyone could remember, one of their safest seats in Parliament. The major challenger to the Conservative member of parliament Gerry Malone was the Liberal Democrat Mark Oaten. There were various irregularities with the election, including some disputed votes and a spoiler candidate standing as a "Top Choice Liberal Democrat" who "stole" up to 600 votes from the real Liberal Democrats.
After several recounts on election night Oaten was elected by a margin of two votes. The defeated Conservative went to court and the judge ruled that there should be a by-election several months later. The people of Winchester did not react well to a bad loser. In the by-election Oaten was returned with a thumping majority of 21,000 votes, a humiliating defeat for Malone. Malone had felt the seat was his right. The people of Winchester thought differently.
The above examples, when looked at alongside the pan-blue camp's reaction to the election result, illustrate the fact that they basically do not understand or appreciate democracy. For KMT Chairman Lien Chan and PFP Chairman James Soong, it really is the end if they don't win. And there are very serious issues [of survival] for the KMT and PFP themselves.
The problems of the UK's Conservative Party in the wake of the 1997 election stem in part from its [inability to believe that it had lost]. For six years following its defeat it was more interested in fighting itself than fighting the government. That was after 18 years in power. The KMT had 50 years of nearly absolute power. Despite the closeness of the election, the KMT has a long road to travel before it will be in a fit state to meaningfully contribute to Taiwanese politics.
-----------------------------------------
On March 27, 2004 ……
China's future, here and now
William Stimson, Taichung
The winning party in the presidential election represents the green bud of democracy in China, the losers the dead wood of a China up against democracy. Historically China has not been about democracy, but raw power -- at whatever cost.
In the last US presidential election, there was a real question of who won. Gore received the most votes. There was a problem with ballots in Florida. Yet Gore conceded graciously to US President George W. Bush -- and thus averted a constitutional crisis.
The behavior of the KMT is the opposite. They would rip Taiwan apart to get power. Democracy was fine with them so long as it was just puppet theater. But [when confronted with] a democracy that's real, they cry foul.
Granted, these people are past masters when it comes to foul play -- after half a century of rigged elections, phoney ballots, bought votes, imprisoned opponents and shut-down newspapers. I don't think anybody questions the KMT's expertise in this area. It's their audacity that shocks, and their poor sportsmanship.
We see here, played out in advance in Taiwan, what is going to happen in China. There will be a fight between freedom and power. What we see in this election is the test run. That's why it's so important we get it right here, now. It's not just about this nation's future. It's about China's. It's not just about an election. It's about democracy.
The KMT can kick and they can scream but they can't turn back history. Neither can China.
-----------------------------------------
On March 27, 2004 ……
Justice minister criticizes Lien and Soong's actions
"Remember what he [James Soong]
said when prosecutors decided not to indict him over the Chung Hsing Bills
Finance scandal ... Thank you justice, for cleaning my name.' Now he is
complaining that justice is not fair." --- Chen Ding-nan, minister
of justice
UNCONSTITUTIONAL: Chen Ding-nan said
the pan-blue candidates have tried to interfere with the judicial system and
constantly tried to humiliate the judiciary
By Jimmy Chuang, STAFF REPORTER
Minister of Justice Chen Ding-nan yesterday complained that the pan-blue camp was trying to take advantage of the legislature to interfere with justice.
The minister was obviously upset about the pan-blue camp's constant criticisms over the past week as he attended a breakfast meeting with Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) lawmakers at the Legislative Yuan.
"First of all, I would say that Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] Chairman Lien Chan is not qualified to be a presidential candidate because of his attempts to manipulate the Constitution," he said.
The minister said that to recount the ballots, everything had to be processed according to law.
However, he said, because of their political ambitions , Lien and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong had constantly tried a variety of possibilities to get judges and the Central Election Committee (CEC) to stage a recount, and they did not show any respect toward justice at all.
"These actions are against the Constitution. If a recount is requested, everybody should follow the law and let judges do their jobs," Chen said. "How can a person like him [Lien] become our president?"
The minister also complained that the pan-blue camp had been trying to take advantage of the legislature to interfere with the judicial system, referring to attempts by KMT and PFP lawmakers to establish a special task force to investigate the shooting of President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu on March 19.
"All law enforcement officers and experts are now working on the case. Everybody wants to arrest the gunman as soon as possible," the minister said.
"It seems to be that their [the pan-blue camp] attitude shows that they do not trust our officers at all. This is absurd," he said.
He said the pan-blue camp was actually trying to start a revolution by questioning the shooting and staging demonstrations to back their demands for a recount.
Chen Ding-nan said Soong had constantly tried to humiliate the judiciary.
"Remember what he said when prosecutors decided not to indict him over the Chung Hsing Bills Finance scandal?" the minister said. "He said, `Thank you justice, for clearing my name.' Now he is complaining that justice is not fair."
"Lien and Soong do not respect the justice system at all," he said.
"How can they lead the public to learn how to do it [respect the system]? I don't think they can," he said.
-----------------------------------------
On March 27, 2004 ……
Chen declared winner despite protests
CONSENSUS: Despite angry protesters throwing eggs outside, the Central Election Commission announced that President Chen Shui-bian had won the election
By Cody Yiu, STAFF REPORTER , WITH REUTERS
Angry pan-blue supporters stormed the Central Election Commission (CEC) yesterday, but failed to prevent it from formally declaring the re-election of incumbent President Chen Shui-bian.
The commission said it would use alternative means of making its announcement public after protesters ripped the declaration off the CEC bulletin board last night.
"This decision to announce the winner was not done through voting, but by a consensus. The announcement does not have to be posted on the commissions' bulletin board; it can also be announced in newspapers or through a media release," a commission member said on condition of anonymity.
According to the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Election and Recall Law, the commission had to hold a procedural meeting and announce a winner within seven days after the election.
About 200 angry pan-blue protesters blocked the entrance area of the administration building where the commission was meeting.
The protesters threw rocks and eggs and scuffled with helmeted riot police carrying shields.
"Truth unclear, suspend declaration," the demonstrators shouted. "Down with the commission."
A handful of KMT and People First Party (PFP) legislators also arrived at the scene to demand that the commission desist from declaring a winner in last Saturday's election before a decision on a recount is reached.
"You must be responsible to history," one opposition lawmaker shouted outside the commission meeting room.
At around 4:30pm protesters managed to force their way through the lines of police, entered the building by smashing the glass doors and rushed to the floor where the commission's meeting was held.
By this time the 17 members of the commission had already quietly left the building through an alternate exit.
"By posting the announcement, the commission is triggering a volcano that was already close to eruption," said PFP legislator Lee Ching-hua.
CEC Chairman George Huang left yesterday's meeting for a few minutes to listen to Lee and another PFP legislator, Feng Ting-kuo, who expressed their concern about the posting of the announcement.
Around 7pm, guarded by police, commission members posted the announcement on the bulletin board, but it was immediately ripped off by angry protesters.
Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou yesterday announced that the police would arrest anyone breaking the law.
Pan-blue supporters tussle with police outside the offices of the
Central Election Commission yesterday.
-----------------------------------------
On March 27, 2004 ……
Jason Hu let `terror' poster stay in circulation
NO RECALL: The Taichung mayor and KMT powerbroker had expressed shock at the pan-blue camp's poster but did not recall it or warn aides against using such material
By Martin Williams and Joy Su, STAFF REPORTERS
Taichung City Mayor and former foreign minister Jason Hu was aware that pan-blue campaign literature featuring an image from the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on New York City had been distributed, but took no action to recall the posters, according to his aides.
"Hu was shocked by the campaign literature and said that it was not a good way of doing things," said Huang Wen-ming, secretary to the Taichung mayor.
However, KMT officials also said that
Hu, the director general of the pan-blue campaign headquarters in Taichung, did
not take any action to stop the circulation of the poster or prevent future
campaign literature from using similar material.
"The poster was only distributed once, mostly as newspaper inserts. Hu never asked the campaign headquarters to put a halt on distribution or to recall the posters that had already been given out," said Chen Ching-fu, head of the publicity department at the KMT's Taichung headquarters.
Featuring pictures of former Iraqi
president Saddam Hussein, al-Qaeda terror figurehead Osama bin Laden and the
destruction of one of the World Trade Center towers in New York City, the
campaign poster warns the public against voting for President Chen Shui-bian.
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Hsiao Bi-khim, the director of the DPP's International Affairs Department, yesterday called the poster "outrageously offensive and insulting."
"Chen has spent his life
fighting for democracy. To call him a dictator or terrorist is an insult. It is
an insult not just to Chen, but to all those who support democracy," Hsiao
said.
"The use of images from an atrocity on the poster is highly inappropriate and is culturally insensitive," she said, adding that Hu had previously served as Minister of Foreign Affairs.
GUGGENHEIM
Meanwhile, the Guggenheim Museum in New York City, with whom Hu has been in difficult negotiations for months over establishing a satellite museum in Taichung, said yesterday through press officer Jennifer Russo that it would not comment on Hu or the KMT-People First Party alliance using images of the destruction of the Twin Towers or Adolf Hitler.
Hu must still secure a significant proportion of funds from the central government for the museum project to proceed.
On Thursday, the Taipei Times contacted several representative offices for their response to the endorsement of the "terrorism" poster by the former foreign minister.
David Miller, an assistant information officer from the American Institute in Taiwan, declined to comment on the content of the poster, saying that it was an "internal affair."
Maggie Yeh, head of press and public affairs for the British Cultural and Trade Office, said director general Derek Marsh was not prepared to comment on the matter.
The Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the US killed 68 British nationals.
Howard Lin, press officer at the Israel Economic and Culture Office in Taipei, also declined to respond, saying that it was an "internal affair" and that it was not possible to comment at this "sensitive political moment."
A scan of the reverse side of the poster issued by the Taichung
pan-blue campaign headquarters showing people how to avoid voting in the
referendum last Saturday.
-----------------------------------------
On March 27, 2004 ……
Democracy will ultimately prevail
The post-election political protests initiated by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan against the President Chen Shui-bian have produced the misleading perception internationally that the nation's nascent democracy is on the brink of crisis. Are the thousands of protesters outside the Presidential Office building and the pan-blue demonstrations planned for today proof of an extremely divided society and a severe lack of faith in Taiwan's democratic system? No, they aren't.
The entire political fiasco created by the pan-blue camp is a disgrace to the nation's hard-won democracy -- but an even bigger public-relations disaster for the KMT. Lien's narrow-mindedness in pursuing the invalidation of the election and his lust for power not only have undermined the legitimacy of his call for a recount but also have wounded the pan-blue alliance. Society would have begun healing the divisions caused by the election campaign if it weren't for Lien's refusal to recognize that he led his party to a second-straight presidential-election loss.
Given Chen's razor-thin margin of victory, it is understandable that Lien supporters would want to voice their dissatisfaction. But the key is how to translate this public dissatisfaction into a driving force for the pan-blue camp. The close race between US President George W. Bush and former vice president Al Gore in the US presidential 2000 election is a classic example of how democratic values can be treasured.
After a month-long recount in Florida and the Supreme Court's rejection of his petition, Gore's concession speech called upon Americans to heal the divisions of the campaign. Gore extended his support to Bush by saying that "partisan feeling must yield to patriotism ... what remains of partisan rancor must now be put aside and may God bless his stewardship of this country."
Gore's timely statement saved the American people from endless political maneuvering and a potentially empty power center. Neither he nor Bush anticipated any political turmoil. Both of them understood that their differences had to be resolved through the honored institutions of the US' democracy.
Compare Gore's words and actions with those of Lien. Gore strongly disagreed with the Supreme Court's decision, but he accepted it for the sake of the American people and the strength of American democracy. Lien first filed a lawsuit asking for a recount, but failed to provide any concrete evidence of vote-rigging. Then he questioned the validity of the election and called for a new one -- even before the Taiwan High Court threw out his first suit.
Each time Lien has been offered what he has demanded -- a recount and a broader investigation into the attack on Chen last Friday -- he has refused to accept the offer and has made a new demand. At each step, he has shown he is willing to see the nation's democracy trampled on.
This is what separates a great political leader from a political clown. Disappointment must be overcome by love of country. A country's emerging democracy must not be sacrificed for one man's political vanity.
Today's rally could be a turning point in this country's history. Any attempt to riot will turn the clock back. This would be a huge setback and humiliation to what people have strived for in the past decades.
The people clearly believe in democratic consolidation and they shall prevail. Hopefully the international community will not see this political grandstanding by Lien as a sign of crisis.
The strength of the nation's democracy is shown most clearly through the difficulties it can endure. There is no reason not to have full confidence that democratic values will ultimately prevail -- and that most of the people who live in this country will accept the result peacefully and follow the spirit of reconciliation.
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------