Soong Takes Leave Of Absence: Keeps Power, Sheds Responsibility

In the Oct 22nd update of a previous post, I wondered how capitulationist People First Party Chairman James Soong could pretend that he doesn’t represent the PFP in his dealings with American representatives.  A few days ago, I received my answer from a few acid comments in Taiwan’s China Post:

To justify Soong’s claim as an independent, he asked for and of course was given by himself a "leave of absence" from his job as chairman of the People First Party.

Soong’s on a "leave of absence", so he doesn’t represent the party.  Well, I GUESS that makes sense.  Still, it’s funny how it looks like he’s still calling the shots over at the PFP:

The People First Party remains adamantly opposed to the [special] arms deal for one more reason now.  Soong and his lawmakers want an open apology from [American representative] Stephen Young for the spontaneous comment he made on National Day*…Soong has made it clear that there would be no compromise on the arms purchase without Young’s apology.

Now THERE’S an enticing offer.  Apologize to Soong so that he’ll compromise on the arms package.  You know – the one he’s blocked 58 times previously from going to a vote.

The China Post‘s wrong.  The PFP doesn’t have another reason to oppose the special arms bill.  It just has another excuse.

* For Mr. Young’s comments and the reason they were given, see my post, KMT Gripes About America.

The KMT’s Offer To Communist China

Janus-like, KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou looks to future Chinese negotiations, and promises if elected president, he’ll negotiate a deal whereby Taiwan won’t declare independence if China agrees not to attack it.

Then, with his other face, he tells Taiwanese voters that Taiwan is ALREADY independent.

Wouldn’t China view future statements like this as violations of this hypothetical agreement?  Guess that’ll be for China to judge after Ma’s elected.

But more importantly, it’s something for Taiwanese to decide BEFORE he’s elected.

UPDATE:  A good Taipei Times editorial on the subject can be found here.

Parliamentary Maneuver Of The Week

Dr. Marvin Monroe with his psychiatric patient, Bart Simpson

Dr. Marvin Monroe:  You LIKE attention, don’t you Li Ao?

Legislator Li:  Do I EVER!  Ha-haaa!

Dr. Monroe:  Well, we ALL do.  The PROBLEM is, you don’t care whether you get GOOD attention, for say, proposing beneficial new laws in the Taiwanese legislature…or BAD attention, for say, opening a can of tear gas inside a crowded committee room while warding off fellow politicians with an electric stun baton.

Legislator Lee Ao spraying can of tear gas in Taiwanese legislature

(Image of Independent Lawmaker (and Taipei mayoral candidate) Li Ao from Wednesday’s Taipei Times.  Yes, that’s a V for Vendetta-style Guy Fawkes mask affixed to the front of his gas mask.)

CAVEAT:  Currently, the public only has Mr. Li’s word to go on that his gas bomb actually contained what he said it contained.  There’s some corroboration in the fact that some committee members left the room coughing and tearing up, but it’s somewhat odd that there are no reports of any vomiting.

i-2

KMT Gripes About America

You’d think the KMT would be happy.  Earlier this year, their chairman was welcomed with open arms in D.C., while their chief rival was generously offered the opportunity to rub shoulders with American movers and shakers.

In Alaska.

A few years prior to that, something similar happened.  The KMT was bitterly opposed to President Chen’s plan for a national referendum, and the Bush administration came out against it.  Chen was forced to alter the referendum’s wording, while the KMT gloated at this public loss of face.

But that was then.  Recently they’ve been asking, "What have you done for me, lately?"

Could the chief [U.S.] representative in Taiwan be named a persona non grata by lawmakers who were mostly U.S.-trained and known for their pro-U.S. stance?

Last Wednesday, the day after the famous National Day "disgrace", some two dozen "pan-blue" (KMT plus PFP) lawmakers actually talked about it.

Foreigners educated in America don’t necessarily become pro-American, but let’s let that slide.  The disgrace in sneer quotes the China Post refers to is when the KMT and its allies disrupted Taiwan’s National Day ceremonies by interrupting the president’s speech and engaging in fist fights with the president’s party.

If that happened on July 4th in America, would it be a disgrace?  Or merely a "disgrace"?

What irritated the KMT was what the representative said afterwards.  When asked to comment by the local media, Stephen Young said, "They should watch their manners…Go ask James Soong – why?"

(James Soong, chairman of the pro-communist People First Party, heckled the President’s speech and disrupted an official procession by marching with them while shouting anti-Chen slogans.)

Stephen Young’s candor on this matter wasn’t the only thing that upset the KMT.  In addition, they strongly disapprove of his efforts to lobby them into buying the weapons package President Bush approved back in 2001.  The weapons package that the KMT has blocked 58 times over the last two years.*

I imagine Mr. Young has been candid with them about THAT issue, as well.  Candid enough to tell them that their obstructionist record is starting to make America question their commitment to their own nation’s  security.

The China Post reveals the real reason for the KMT’s obstinacy:

There [was] "[a] sea change in KMT/PFP thinking" after historic visits to Beijing by KMT chairman Lien Chan and PFP chairman James Soong in 2005.  The blue camp’s support for a security relationship with [America]…seems in doubt now.

Perhaps it would be a good thing if the KMT did expel Mr. Young.  It might serve as a powerful wake-up call to Washington that the KMT is truly America’s ally no longer.

* The China Post dishonestly tries to divert some of the blame for the delay onto President Chen, claiming that he didn’t offer the weapons package to the legislature for two years because of its cost.

The reality is that it took 18 months after Bush’s offer for the package to be approved and given a price tag by the American military bureaucracy.  It was utterly impossible for Chen to offer the package to the legislature during that time.

UPDATE:  Another bone in the KMT’s craw:

The blue camp has been angry with the U.S. for breaking a promise of not recognizing President Chen’s 2004 re-election before a recount.

Who made this promise?  The President?  The V.P.?  Some low-level flunky in the State Department?  How could such a promise be issued at all, when it was unclear at the time that there would even BE a recount?

I have no recollection of this promise being mentioned in any of the local media, and I followed the coverage here pretty closely.  What I DO remember is the China Post calling on America not to congratulate Chen until after a recount, but that’s quite different from the promise having actually been made.  Perhaps the Post confuses its desires with reality:

If wishes were horses,
Beggars would ride;
If wishes were fishes,
We’d all have some fried.

The China Post then concludes with a complaint somewhat lacking in specificity:

Taiwan’s mentor-and-protector is also criticized for failing to stop the Chen administration from degenerating in all aspects, turning Taiwan into a big mess.

Yep, this whole "self-determination" thing really isn’t working out.  Could you Yanks do us a favor and dispatch the Delta Force next time madman Chen renames an airport or something?

Thanks a bunch.

UPDATE (Oct 22/06):  James Soong’s still pouting:

…Soong said he had turned down a request from American Institute in Taiwan [AIT] officials for a meeting with him next week.

"There is no need [for the AIT officials] to see me. Right now I am not the PFP’s representative," Soong said, without elaborating on why AIT officials wished to see him.

Yes, yes, I know, Soong’s running as an independent for mayor of Taipei.  But the CHAIRMAN of the PFP pretends that he doesn’t REPRESENT the PFP?

Riiight.

He explains his refusal this way:

"It’s not the right time to review the arms bill when millions of people are staging a sit-in [against the president]. Furthermore, AIT officials talked nonsense on Double Ten day," Soong said.

Soong’s not so shy about talking a little nonsense of his own.  I was at the Taipei Train Station on Friday.  Those "millions of people"?  They’re down to a few hundred, at most.

Is This For Real?

Headline from The Australian:  "China may back coup against Kim [Jong-il]."  Hat tip to The Corner.

Make of it what you will.

UPDATE (Oct 19/06):  More on this from Strategy Page.

UPDATE (Oct 22/06):  I don’t buy all of the blogger’s conclusions, but this is certainly an interesting post on the subject.  (Hat tip to AsiaPundit.)

UPDATE (Oct 26/06):  Satire from The Onion on the subject.  (Hat tip to AsiaPundit.)

Direct Democracy

Yesterday’s editorial from the Taiwan News had a couple of lines I thought were very well-put:

Washington’s anxiety about cross-strait tension comes largely from the perception that Beijing will make a "dangerous, objectionable, and foolish response" to Taiwan’s continued affirmation of its sovereignty and independence.

Since the Beijing regime is even less predictable than democratic Taiwan it has been easier for Washington to attempt to constrain Taipei first or even treat the Taiwan leader as a "trouble-maker" than to address the structural problems [ie: CHINA] that cause these tensions.

There was another line that got me to thinking, though:

…the DPP administration [is making] efforts to deepen Taiwan’s democracy and enhance the effectiveness of democratic governance through constitutional reforms and the introduction of methods of direct democracy, which are common features of democratic societies around the world.  [Emphasis added]

I wonder if recent events surrounding Shih Ming-teh’s redshirts haven’t made DPP politicians a bit more wary of direct democracy.  I certainly wouldn’t blame them if they were.