20040525
=======
Isolation on May 25, 2004 ……
Threats only isolate China's leaders
Although President Chen Shui-bian's inauguration speech sought to address issues from all sides and to appeal for a consensus among the majority in Taiwan and concerned members of the international community, a speech to please everyone was an impossibility. Given the varied controversies surrounding cross-strait relations, it will be an achievement if the speech allays internal disputes and dispels the international community's fear of an outright confrontation. As for China's reaction, Taiwan only needs to observe but not fret, since China will never be satisfied unless Taiwan shows the white flag.
Yesterday, Zhang Mingqing, spokesman of the Taiwan Affairs Office of China's State Council, made an announcement parroting China's May 17 statement. The old tactic of saber-rattling failed to register a response. Taiwan's lukewarm reaction to Zhang's announcement shows the flagging effect of China's intimidation. Compared with the hard words of the May 17 statement that prompted the TAIEX to plunge by 294 points, Zhang's announcement only caused the TAIEX to slip 22 points. During Zhang's press conference, Taiwan's stock market even rebounded after negative factors drained away. Apparently Taiwan is growing immune to China's threats. China's May 17 statement was only able to escalate cross-strait tensions because China had kept a low profile during the presidential election to keep from repeating its mistake of creating a pro-Chen backlash in the 2000 presidential election.
China actually obtained a copy of the speech via the US and rushed to announce its position prior to Chen's inauguration. China's two reactions in a week indicate it is gravely concerned with the international response to the speech.
Chen had set goals: to calm the electorate at home, to relieve the anxious US and the international community, and to deprive China of any excuse to use force against Taiwan.
Some people in Taiwan criticized Chen for con-ceding too much regarding the cross-strait relationship in his speech, as he promised that changes to the Constitution would not touch on issues of the country's national flag, title or sovereignty. He also approached the topic of constitutional reform in terms of "re-engineering" rather than as writing a new Constitution. Despite this complaint, the speech was well-received by the public.
Chen's inauguration speech was better received by the international community. It was acclaimed as "responsible and constructive" by the US State Department and viewed positively by other governments. Compared with the international response to Chen's speech, Beijing's comment appears jarring. Its failure to influence international opinion forced it to make another statement.
Yet as the US said on May 17, China's military threat is unnecessary. What Zhang said over the weekend was a mere reiteration of intimidation, which was neither positive nor constructive for cross-strait dialogue. China's decision to make the second statement was simply another mistake.
As Taiwan offers the olive branch of peace and China rattles its saber, the international community can easily tell which side shows flexibility and aspirations for peace, and which side is the troublemaker and source of cross-strait tension. Although power and influence define a country's role in the global arena, the capacity to differentiate right and wrong cannot be ignored. It is easy to tell who is right and who is wrong in the cross-strait relationship from the statements of all sides.
-----------------------------------------
On May 25, 2004 ……
Lien, Soong just don't get it
By Jason Lee, Singapore
After the March 19 assassination attempt and the numerous violent rallies held in the wake of the presidential election the next day, I rejoice for both Taiwanese and the international community in general at President Chen Shui-bian's inauguration last week.
The insignificant and ungracious act of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in holding their own rally on the same day did not succeed in undermining the joyous democratic act of swearing in the winners of the election.
It seems to me, a foreign observer, that over the past four years the KMT and People First Party (PFP) have failed to learn how to be magnanimous in defeat. In 2000, both KMT Chairman Lien Chan and PFP Chairman James Soong boycotted Chen's inauguration ceremony, and this year they went a step further by holding a rally of their own. Is there any significance to such an act? To many Taiwanese and the international community it only speaks of Lien's and Soong's lack of graciousness.
Perhaps they can learn something about graciousness and humility from former US presidential candidate Al Gore, who not only gracefully con-ceded defeat to George W. Bush (despite having secured the majority vote), but also attended Bush's inauguration ceremony.
Like many observers, I had believed that Lien would quit as KMT chairman after being defeated in two consecutive presidential elections. He instead tried to safeguard his chairmanship by hurling around allegations of an unfair election and seeking a recount. Now that the recount has been agreed upon, Lien realizes that his chances of overturning the results are as good as non-existent. What next?
Probably because Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou and Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng had been touted by many observers as being capable of replacing him as KMT chairman, Lien worked out a merger deal with the PFP. Such a deal would only benefit both Lien and Soong. Allow me to elaborate.
The PFP's members are fiercely loyal to Soong (after all, they left the KMT in 2000 to support him when he set up the PFP). The KMT, on the other hand, seems to be a divided and split group today, with the members who want a new chairman probably outnumbering Lien's core supporters. After the merger, the original PFP members would surely want to see Soong run again in the next presidential election, either as president or vice-president.
With KMT members probably reluctant to see a Soong-Ma or Soong-Wang ticket in the 2008 presidential election, Lien would probably advocate a deal in which he would again run for president with Soong as his running mate. If an opinion poll of KMT members were to be conducted today, it would probably indicate that the majority opinion favors Ma or Wang running in 2008. Given the failure of Lien and Soong to defeat Chen in 2000 and this year, surely the best bet for the KMT would be younger aspirants such as Ma and Wang.
Unfortunately for the KMT, Lien and Soong, who will be 72 and 66 respectively in 2008, have probably dropped hints of their ambitions and aspirations for a third attempt at the presidency, based on their plan for a KMT-PFP merger. It is not so much the plan itself, but rather the signs that talks of the merger deal were conducted only between the two men. Otherwise, shouldn't such a decision be left to the younger leaders in both parties?
It seems that Lien and Soong simply won't accept the choice of the majority of Taiwanese -- that is, they have twice rejected both men as leaders of the country. The problem is, both power-hungry men just don't get it. Hopefully, the downpour on the day of Chen's inauguration woke both men up and cleansed their thinking.
-----------------------------------------
On May 25, 2004 ……
-----------------------------------------