Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Australia could split with U.S. over Taiwan, minister warns
Mon Jul 30 2001 16:14:51 ET
Sydney (dpa) - Australia would not automatically side with the United States in a conflict with China over Taiwan, a senior Canberra official said Sunday.
Defence Minister Peter Reith made the comment after welcoming U.S. counterpart Donald Rumsfeld to Australia for bilateral defence talks.
At the day-long talks in Canberra, Rumsfeld will be flanked by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, who is expected to arrives in Australia late Sunday for the final leg of a five-nation tour of the region.
Reith affirmed that Canberra remained Washington's staunchest ally and that he was keen to push for a closer relationship on technology, especially for submarines.
But he warned that Australia could take a different line from America over the issue of Taiwan - a stance that reflected a different attitude towards Beijing.
``We don't agree with the Americans on everything (but) there are a lot of things that we do agree with them on,'' Reith said.
He said Australia could give a lead to the United States on relations with Indonesia.
``If you assess our relationship to Indonesia versus the U.S. to Indonesia, we are probably a bit ahead of the U.S.,'' Reith said.
Certain for discussion at Monday's bilateral talks will be the controversial cancellation of a multimillion-dollar tender with a German company to supply new combat systems for Australia's six Collins-class submarines.
Reith, in explaining the shock decision, cited the strategic need to cooperate with the United States on submarine operations.
Reith also flagged a rift with America over its reluctance to sign international covenants to limit the spread of biological weapons.
``We are disappointed with what they've said on that. We'll be making that point again to them,'' Reith said.
END
I have always assumed that in any conflict with China over Taiwan, the US might have to go it alone, with little active or passive aid from others.
However, the ham-handed handling of various incidents by authoritarian governments, such as China's clash with the US over the Hainan spy plane incident, or the deplorable public-relations done by the Russian government during the mop-up of the Kursk tragedy, gives me hope that in the process of their quest to recapture Taiwan the Chinese will commit enough actual and perceived atrocities to swing some countries over to our side.
Reading between the lines of this article, Australia's criticism of the US over the bio weapons treaty just seems to be a bone thrown at public opinion. More interesting is the cancellation of those German subs. Perhaps the Australians are working more closely with the US behind the scenes than their government will publicly admit. Go ANZUS! (...uh...still waiting for New Zealand to come around on that one...)
Fine, we'll direct a spare nuke to Sydney. The Freepers in North Australia will do a fine job of restructuring whats left.
It is all part of the American idea of "Strategic ambiguity" and Australia has to play its part. I only wish I could tell you about some of the plans I've seen. Rest assured, they would make you a happy FReeper.
I don't know the first thing about the ins and outs of subtle foreign policy strategies. However, what Australia feels or doesn't feel about Taiwan has to be irrelevant in whether the US chooses to follow her own law with regard to siding with the Taiwanese versus Red China.
I now see your post "Gang of Four Leaves China Out in the Cold" so I realize there is more going on to the defense consultations than meets the eye.
But he warned that Australia could take a different line from America over the issue of Taiwan - a stance that reflected a different attitude towards Beijing.
************************
Australia, China and Taiwan are in the same neighborhood, Australia knows the Chinese are truly nuts over the issue of Taiwan, and Australia doesn't want to be attacked, so they're apparently going to play Ostrich (or Emu, I guess I should say). Too bad. If enough countries stood up to China the Chinese might back off Taiwan, but that isn't going to happen. Each country only cares about the end of its own nose.
--Old Lady
When 47% of Taiwanese now support China's "one country, two systems" reunification plan, whoever said China and Taiwan need go to war in the first place? When 10,000 Taiwanese are moving to China every day starting new businesses on the mainland, marrying mainland wives, investing in everything on the mainland from new restaurants to new semiconductor plants, whoever said they need to go to war in the first place except some warmongers who would nothing better to see a war? Let's not count our chickens before they hatch.
My angle on Australia is that like every other person, they view China as the bigger potential market in the future than Taiwan (1.3 billion is a bigger market than 23 million). If you're going to bet on any horse at all, you should bet on the one with the bigger potential market for your own country's long-term benefit. The Taiwansese themselves (of all people you wouldn't expect to be investing in China) are investing in China like crazy these days and openly considering re-unifying with the mainland more than ever before.
You are leaving one thing out of the picture - the 300 Chinese missiles aimed at Taiwan with more to come, the Chinese mockup of Taiwan's largest airbase which Chinese troops practice attacking and taking over, China practicing nuclear intervention with Russia against the US over Taiwan -- all hostile.
With such hostile force aimed at you, would you want to "reunify"?
Taiwan has never been part of mainland communist China. Why should they "reunify"?
--Old Lady
Taiwan is a democracy. They freely elected their government. Why should they accept another government which tries to force itself down their throats under threat of war?
--Old Lady
ping
Both China and Taiwan have been at each other's necks for the past 50 years, since the very beginning of China's Civil War. That they should be pointing missiles at each other is not surprising. What is new is all the recent investment and settlement in China by Taiwanese and the new polls in Taiwan which are indicating the Taiwanese do want to re-unify more than ever before.
If China is such a big, scary country, why are all the Taiwanese investing there, about $100 billion in the past 10 years and $20 billion in the past year alone?
I don't see it the same way at all.
Of course there are some people who only look at money. And because of that China gets away with being the worst human rights abuser on the planet.
China is a hostile, aggressive country and they mean to take Taiwan as soon as they can get away with it, in my opinion within the year after they enter the WTO. Taiwan is a democracy and has never been part of communist China, although they've been threatened by China for years.
--Old Lady
To tell you the truth, if you visited Taiwan tomorrow and randomly interviewed Taiwanese on the street, you'd discover that more Taiwanese view China as the place their next place of employment (because of the many Taiwanese businesses moving to China) rather than as the big, scary threat you imagine.
In the grand scheme of things, Australia doesn't even rate a mention. Who needs them?
Simply put, most Taiwanese are not as worried about China as you seem to be. China is more the place they think they can make their next $1 million. I'm not pulling your chain.
Well, you have the right to your opinion and I have the right to mine, and mine is based on more than imagination.
Signing off, Old Lady
Well, just ask any Taiwanese whether I'm inaccurately portraying how Taiwanese think or not. That's all I ask.
I know some Taiwanese people and the ones I know are very worried about the threat from China.
Last word from me, as I am really signing off -- Bill Gertz of the Washington Times reported in an article dated April 30, 2001 that in February 2001 Chinese and Russian troops practiced a nuclear response to the United States if the US intervenes over Taiwan. China has said Taiwan MUST "reunify" and that it will be taken at some point by force if it does not peacefully agree, although China has not set a deadline. President Bush has said he will defend Taiwan if it is attacked.
Specifically what do you think about this?
--Old Lady
Chipman, this is the article I was talking about in my post directly above. If you have not read it I highly recommend you take a look. Your points about the value of money, trade, jobs are good but I believe you are only looking at financial material. Because you use words like "imagination" I think you are not reading military articles. Take a look and widen your knowledge.
Chase R, this is an article to copy and keep.
Good night all, Old Lady
*******************************************
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b2a327f4cb1.htm
Russian forces help China in mock conflict
Source: The Washington Times
Published: April 30, 2001 Author: Bil Gertz
Russian military forces intervened in a mock nuclear conflict between China and the United States over Taiwan during strategic exercises that included Russian preparations to use nuclear weapons on U.S. forces in Asia, The Washington Times has learned.
The strategic exercises took place in late February and included practice bombing runs with Russian Tu-22 Backfire bombers that flew close to Japanese airspace, according to defense officials familiar with a National Security Agency analysis of the Russian war games.
"The Russians were practicing nuclear intervention against U.S. troops on Taiwan," said an intelligence official familiar with classified reports on the exercise.
In Moscow yesterday, Russian President Vladimir Putin met Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan as part of preparations for the signing of a treaty of friendship and cooperation between the two countries in July.
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said the treaty "will play a great role in enriching the relations between our countries in all spheres." The pact also "will further strategic stability and security around the world," he said.
Disclosure of the Russia-China strategic military cooperation comes as the Bush administration is hardening its views on China.
President Bush last week shifted away from past ambiguity on whether the United States would defend Taiwan in a conflict. The president said the United States would do "whatever it takes" to defend the island. U.S. officials said Beijing interpreted that statement as a willingness by the United States to use both conventional and nuclear forces in a conflict over Taiwan.
A major strategy review now being conducted for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld will recommend a major strategic shift from Europe to Asia, specifically to deal with the emerging threat of China, according to Pentagon officials familiar with an early draft.
According to the NSA assessment of the February Russian war games, the Russians practiced fighting in Europe and Asia during one of the largest exercises in the past decade, the officials said. The intelligence report was based on communications among Russian forces during the maneuvers Feb. 12 to 16.
"The Asia scenario began with a Chinese military attack on Taiwan that was followed by the use of U.S. ground troops" on the island, said one official.
Next, China escalated the conflict by firing tactical nuclear missiles on the U.S. troops in Taiwan, prompting U.S. nuclear strikes on Chinese forces.
Russian nuclear forces then threatened to use nuclear missile strikes on U.S. forces in the region, including strikes on troops in South Korea and Japan.
Japan's military sent jet interceptors to confront two Russian Tu-22 bombers and two Su-27 fighter-bombers that Tokyo said had violated Japanese airspace. Russia denied there were any violations of Japanese airspace.
A U.S. intelligence official familiar with the NSA analysis said the Tu-22s, which are equipped with long-range nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, were part of the Russian intervention on behalf of China during the simulated conflict over Taiwan. A second intelligence official, however, said he was unaware of the "Taiwan angle."
The European exercise involved a conflict between Russian and NATO forces - a scenario practiced in past exercises.
The Asian exercise was the first time Russian forces had practiced fighting the United States in the Pacific region. It also shows the growing strategic partnership between China and Russia.
Russia and China have been moving closer together in what many analysts see as an anti-U.S. alliance. Moscow feels threatened by NATO's inclusion two years ago of Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic, and China has begun turning against what it calls "U.S. hegemonism" since the 1999 U.S. air war against Yugoslavia. The Balkan conflict also angered Beijing because of the accidental bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, which China's government believes was an intentional U.S. attack.
Intelligence officials said that during the strategic exercises Russia test-fired three strategic nuclear missiles, from land-based mobile launchers and from a submarine.
Senior Russian officials, including Mr. Putin and Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev, activated the Russian nuclear command and control suitcase known as a "cheget," officials said.
Marshal Sergeyev, the Russian defense minister, announced Feb. 19 that "all the designated targets were hit by the strategic missiles which were launched, as a training exercise, during the recent live firings," the official Itar-Tass news agency reported.
Two days later, Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov met in Moscow with Zhang Wannian, vice chairman of the Central Military Commission. The two discussed "military-technical cooperation," according to official Russian press reports.
The two officials said military sales from Russia to China would increase 25 percent annually.
Rick Fisher, a specialist on the Chinese military with the Jamestown Foundation, said the Russian exercise on behalf of China is "completely realistic" based on the growth of Russian-Chinese military, technical and diplomatic cooperation over the past decade.
"If the report is true, it would appear to track with Russian reports last year that Russia will sell China new regional strategic weapons like the Oscar-class nuclear cruise missile submarine, Akula-class nuclear attack sub and the Tu-22M Backfire bomber," Mr. Fisher said. "All of this coming together would mean no more peace dividend and the beginning of the next Cold War."
Bruce Blair, a strategic nuclear specialist with the Center for Defense Information, said the Russian-Chinese military exercise, if true, would be a sharp departure from past Russian nuclear exercises.
"I'm not aware of any change in Russian-Chinese relations that would indicate any movement toward preparation for cooperation in nuclear operations, or in political commitment that would justify that intervention," Mr. Blair said in an interview.
"It does illustrate Russia's reliance on nuclear weapons and the growing nuclear tension between the United States and China," Mr. Blair said. "And in a way it is consistent with this notion that we are going to focus more on China in our nuclear planning."
Mr. Blair said he believes the Pentagon strategy review will result in increasing the number of options and targeting of U.S. nuclear weapons on China, which currently is very limited.
U.S. nuclear targeting of Russia probably will decrease by 50 percent from current planning involving strategic land-based, sea-based and aerial nuclear weapons.
Russia recently revised its nuclear doctrine to lower the threshold for using nuclear weapons in conflicts.
The change was made to compensate for the poor state of Russian conventional forces, which have declined sharply since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Spelled your name wrong. Sending you a copy of this Gertz article - good article to read and keep. See the post above.
Old Lady
Yes, I just visited Taiwan in May and I second what you are saying about the Taiwanese attitude towards China. They seem to think they can have their cake and eat it too. They feel that Taiwan is the "goose that lays the golden eggs" for China and that China will not screw them up.
Maybe they are right, but...
I see people around the world believing what their governments or "authorities" tell them, whether it's a government official in Washington or a Communist Party cadre in Beijing. Then the government/authority screws them over and they realize that either "life isn't fair", or that they just sold themselves out.
I am not flat out against reunification between China and Taiwan, but if it happens in the wrong way a lot of people are going to get screwed. The people in Taiwan deserve better than Beijing's government. I'm not really sure if any power in the world (including the US) can prevent them from getting it.
,,, it would have been an interesting scenario if the US had taken out a long lease on Taiwan as the Brits did on HKG. HKG has been a special economic zone for four years now, without too much drama at all. The way Taiwan rebelled against China and has blossomed is what irks the Chinese. It's their need to control that's driving this. As China becomes richer and expands, Taiwan may possibly be absorded and not need US backing. Who knows?
You seem to think that 0% of Taiwanese want to reunify, but many Taiwanese do. A recent poll in Taiwan found that 47% of Taiwanese now favor the "one country, two systems" formula that Beijing has used for Hong Kong.
The U.S. performs military exercises in China's own backyard. Using your logic, is China then to assume the U.S. threatens China? The U.S. performs military exercises with almost every country near China, starting with Japan, S. Korea, Australia, etc. If you're China, wouldn't those acts be provocative? How can you say China doesn't have a right to even try to defend itself?
The U.S. agreed that China and Taiwan should sort out reunification between themselves. It's just notable the level of integration (economic, social, cultural) that seems to be taking place in the past year.
I agree we could soon reunite. However, both Taiwan and the US reject the use of force by the Communists to achieve this.
I never used the term 0%.
I said the military threat from China is real. No country should be forced to make decisions with missiles aimed at their shores.
If a large number of Taiwanese favor "reunification" as you insist, why was the political party in Taiwan that favored "reunification" with communist China soundly defeated in the last election?
Why was President Chen, who ran on an inependence platform, elected?
Why do you use the term "reunification" when historically Taiwan has never been part of communist China?
--Old Lady
Well, you can at least acknowledge the reality that more Taiwanese today than ever before want to reunify with China. That's all the poll showed, which is all the rage in Taiwan now. What's so hard about acknowledging this simple reality? Most Taiwanese themselves think it's notable all the talk of reunification that's going on these days, so what's the big deal about merely acknowledging that reality?
I agree that both China and Taiwan have had their militaries on alert against each other for the past 50 years, but do you really consider that to be a new situation? Is that news to you? It's no more news to me than the fact the N. and S. Korea still eye each other over the DMZ.
The reason Pres. Chen won (without a majority of the actual vote) was because the two other parties split the anti-independence vote. This is common knowledge, and I'm surprised you didn't know it. But Pres. Chen right now is deeply unpopular due to his mishandling of Taiwan's economy (such as being too pro-environment), and China's "one country, two systems" formula has higher poll numbers in China than Pres. Chen himself. If the economy stays bad, it's probably likely Pres. Chen will lose his next election.
The word "reunification" is applicable because most Taiwanese themselves use it. Not only that, most of Taiwan's political parties also still use it.
The U.S. performs military exercises in China's own backyard. Using your logic, is China then to assume the U.S. threatens China?
**************
You write as though China is an innocent party, being threatened without provocation by the United States.
Historically Taiwan has never been part of communist China. Taiwan is a separate country with its own freely elected government. China insists Taiwan must "reunite" either peacefully or by force. The United States under Bush recalled the promise we made to defend a democratic ally and has vowed to protect Taiwan in the event of invasion. Taiwan may be 90 miles from China but does not mean China has the right to eat Taiwan up without the rest of the world even blinking an eye.
Just because China claims Taiwan is part of mainland China does not make it true. China also claims Tibet, which is another lie. In the 1950's communist Chinese invaded Tibet and have systematically done everything to destroy Tibetan culture. Same with Taiwan.
Solve it this way -- take away the missiles and the nuclear threats and the alliance with Russian to go to war against the US over Taiwan, and let everybody in Taiwan freely choose whether they want to be part of communist China. Take a vote, with no force.
--Old Lady
Chances are, in the next election Pres. Chen will be defeated and the KMT will take over. The KMT may very well choose to reunify because it is urging Pres. Chen to re-adopt the one-China policy. Pres. Chen's own advisors from his own party are now publicly calling for him to re-adopt the one-China policy. That is big news in Taiwan these days, too.
"...rather than as the big, scary threat you imagine."
Oh yeah that's it chipman, sure thing.
Chipman, let me quickly pass you this invitation to post in the following thread. (read the original complaint - then, at your leisure, post a reply as to why we shouldn't be concerned with the ulterior motives of "scary threat"/Communist Chinese. Thanks.
TERRY MCAULIFFE - DNC CHAIRMAN - WAS KEY DEFENDENT IN LORAL SHAREHOLDERS CASE ie. CHINAGATE
[
Reply |
Private Reply | To 14 | Top | Last ]
It seems to me every country on earth has a right to defend itself and every tribe or country since the beginning of time has fielded a military out of sheer necessity. From the Egyptians on down to the Romans on down to the British Empire on down to the United States. It seems to me that it's just a historical reality that most peoples and nations have found it necessary to have a military. Are you suggesting that only democracies have the right to have armies? Modern democracy is but 300 years old, and most countries which preceded modern democracy also had their own militaries.
Given the regrettable history that Western countries themselves had in China less than a century ago (Western countries, including the U.S., carved up the physical territory of China into several "spheres of influence"), I don't begrudge China for having a strong military today and most other nations have not unilaterally ceased having their own militaries since 1 century ago. If anything, Western countries have shown a propensity for colonial aggression more than China ever has.
Again, you should be aware most Taiwanese themselves accept and use the term, "reunification," without thinking twice about it. In fact, most Taiwanese also think of Tibet as a part of China, which you probably were not aware of.
This is true that the KMT is trying to regroup from their failure in the last election, and that they want "reunification". The people of Taiwan had an opportunity to elect the KMT candidate and rejected the party. But China may invade Taiwan before "reunification" happens in any election. China has made it clear - in Jiang Zemin's speeches and on government websites - that they demand Taiwan "reunify" peacefully or by force. And since Taiwan has said it will only "reunify" if mainland communist China is a democracy, I do not see a peaceful merger.
You reject or ignore the mainland Chinese military threat, their 300 missiles aimed at Taiwan, their nuclear exercises with Russia against the US over Taiwan, and the principle that Taiwan should be able to determine its future without threat, so I do not see any point in continuing the conversation.
--Old Lady
"You write as though China is an innocent party, being threatened without provocation by the United States."
Phone Man, what we have here - with chipman - is a reincarnation of FR.com poster, Great Wall. (Remember Great Wall...he was constantly apologizing for Communist China.)
To Old, China's merely having a military amounts to "provocation."
In fact, most Taiwanese also think of Tibet as a part of China, which you probably were not aware of.
***********
Let's stick to facts.
Tibet is NOT part of communist China. Tibet was a peaceful Buddhist nation INVADED in the 1950's by Mao's communists, who destroyed monasteries, imprisoned, tortured and killed monks and nuns and citizens. Facts are facts. I don't know what anybody in Taiwan thinks about Tibet, but Tibet was INVADED by its hostile, greedy neighbor, who has proceeded to destroy Tibetan culture and spread lies about it.
It is one thing to argue for the sake of arguing and try to "win" over another poster, but lies are lies and facts are facts. We are writing about real people. If you think communist China is so wonderful, more power to you. But no argument conveniently omitting mountains of fact will convince me. You write as though you work for Xinhua or People Daily.
--Old Lady
chipman:
"I don't begrudge China for having a strong military today....."
Chipman, let me ask right now, do you sympathize with the espionage the slimy Communist China executed upon our country when the Chinese elite prompted their army officials to infiltrate the Clinton White House - hand over to Bill Clinton (via Johnny Chung, John Huang, Charlie Trie) hundreds of thousands of dollars in grocery sacks - thus leading to the Communist Chinese theft of all of our nuclear secrets? Answer us this please.
(by the way, it may be irrelevant chipman, but - Welcome, I see you just arrived here within the past few days)
Uh, did you read the part about Chen's party splitting the anti-independence vote? I'll repeat it, Chen only won (with about 36% of the total vote) because the anti-independence vote was split between the KMT and James Soong's party. That is why Chen won. In the next election, as I said, it's unlikely Chen will be re-elected because of his unpopularity. Your theory about China invading before the next election is just your wild speculation. China has a military, but so does everyone else in Asia. What is your point? Even the smallest country in the world, Brunei, has a military.
No, I never knew Great Wall, but I knew another poster ericbl or something like that who was pro-China and ignored anything anyone wrote about China's military threat. I guess the live missiles communist China threw on Taiwan's shores during their elections in 1996 were imaginary. At any rate it is a total waste of time to argue with someone who refuses to acknowledge mountains of facts.
Signing off, goodnight, Old Lady
Uh, does the U.S. spy on China? Don't most countries spy on each other? Were you born yesterday? Even some of America's allies spy on the U.S. Should China be shocked if the U.S. spies on it?
Last comment - the people of Taiwan had an opportunity to elect the candidate from the KMT and chose not to. That's what elections are all about. The KMT lost.
--Old Lady
Let's not all pretend that spying was invented yesterday and that only the Chinese engage in it. Let's not all act dumb now. The only nefarious thing about spying is if your own country fails to detect the spying done it. But spying itself is to be expected.
So you think Pres. Chen is popular now? Hahaha.
"To Old, China's merely having a military amounts to "provocation."
36 Posted on 07/30/2001 20:06:54 PDT by chipman
Of course China and all countries can have a military.....But let's hurriedly skip over the 'term' military- and get on with asking you chipman, do you agree with the way the Scumbag Communist China - stole ALL of the United States nuclear secrets - with which they have now integrated them into their "military?"
(I have to leave for this evening chipman, nice meeting you and tomorrow, when I return, I'm sure you'll have corresponding answers to my questions to you.)
In all truth, there is probably at least several hundred Taiwanese spies in China right now doing exactly what you allege Charlie Trie did in the U.S. -- that is, trying to bribe CCP officials somewhere or another with garbage bag-fulls of money. But am I "shocked" by that as you seem to be or are pretending to seem to be (I will give your intelligence the benefit of the doubt)? Not one bit.
Chipman is a chiCom propagandist.
He wastes our time.
It's called disrutping.
Come on, you know as well as I that everyone spies or at least tries to spy on each other, or don't you? Just ask yourself is the U.S. actively trying to spy on China's military now? Sure, the EP-3 wasn't just on a sightseeing mission. Or do you allege the EP-3 really was on a sight-seeing mission?
Hahaha, when you can't respond intelligently, insult. That's just your standard operating behavior, and show really I've won the argument. So go ahead, the facts are the facts, and I stand by everything I've said and challenge anyone to attack my facts or reasoning. As for my occupation, I've already told everyone I'm a Caucasian American working in China now for a well-known American hi-tech company.
You seem to think that 0% of Taiwanese want to reunify, but many Taiwanese do. A recent poll in Taiwan found that 47% of Taiwanese now favor the "one country, two systems" formula that Beijing has used for Hong Kong.
This is imply not true.
These fake polls are part of the ChiCom united front and those citing them are obviously chiCom stooges, but also so self contradictory to be amazing.
If Taiwan wants to join the PRC they will or would have already and fake polls and united front lies wouldn't be needed.
It's laughable really. the New Party can barely get one percent and there thay are saying 47 percent support them -- kind of -- New Party themselves don't even say they support one country two systems.
This forum is not for morons who know nothing and will fall for your tripe, nor is it meant to waste bandwidth with it.
Hahaha, the poll was was Taiwanese poll! At least get your facts right.
The polls which show greater support for "one country, two systems" were all conducted by civilian organizations, while the polls which show lower support were all conducted by Pres. Chen. Guess whose government-sponsored progaganda influenced the latter polls?
Thanks for the comment.
Something current and not very flattering about the KMT:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2001/07/30/story/0000096326
The Taipei Times
Monday July 30, 2001
KMT struggling to hang on in face of pro-Taiwan trend
PARTY POLITICS: The year-end elections are a test of whether the 107-year-old KMT and its chairman are hopelessly out of touch with the electorate
By Crystal Hsu, STAFF REPORTER
He came in a distant third in last year's presidential election. A new political group is threatening to take votes from his party in the year-end polls. His pact with James Soong (§º·¡·ì) appears near collapse.
Still, KMT Chairman Lien Chan (³s¾Ô) is day dreaming of a political comeback for his party.
"We shall return," the Panglossian party leader told KMT congress members yesterday. "In four years' time at the latest."
Before reclaiming the presidency from the DPP in 2004, the 107-year-old party must first maintain a plurality -- if not a majority -- in the legislature after the December polls. And the race four months away will make or break a party that has fought hard to appear unnerved by the imminent exodus of members disappointed by the estrangement of former party chairman Lee Teng-hui (§õµn½÷).
"If the KMT outperforms rival parties in the legislative polls and is able to take key counties and cities, the specter of a rift will dissipate," said former Kaohsiung mayor Wu Den-yih (§d´°¸q), a KMT heavyweight.
"Failing that, the party must brace for a revolt that will not only foil its planned comeback but also threaten its viability."
To head off the crisis, the KMT has made unity its top plank for the ongoing national congress.
In addition, the party plans to capitalize on the sputtering economy and paint the DPP government as incapable of pulling the country out of its economic woes.
"The bleak economic picture indeed creates an opportunity for the KMT to win back the voters," said Chu Hsin-ming (¦¶·s¥Á), a political scientist from National Chengchih University. "That explains why the party has launched a series of TV campaigns claiming only the KMT can turn the economy around."
Wu, who seeks a legislative seat from Nantou, said the party has failed to mount an effective campaign thus far. "With a well-planned strategy, the party stands a good chance of grabbing 85 legislative seats," Wu said. "Unfortunately, I have not yet seen a sound plan taking shape, as evidenced in Taipei County, where the party was unable to field a candidate until last week."
Wu was referring to the Taipei County commissioner's race.
The KMT and People First Party had agreed to field a candidate together, but the arrangement fell apart after their preferred choice refused to accept the nomination.
Seeking to pool strength with the PFP, the KMT has hesitated to wrap up its nominating process for the year-end elections, as the two camps compete for roughly the same group of voters.
"Continued posturing and no action will turn the odds increasingly against the opposition alliance, as DPP aspirants have long ago hit the campaign trail," Wu said.
The question of what to do about Lee poses another challenge for the KMT, of which the former president remains a member.
Lee has lent his support to a new group of pro-Taiwan politicians that promise to back the DPP after the year-end legislative elections.
In several interviews, Lee has faulted the KMT for abandoning his "Taiwan first" policies that were popular with the public.
In defiance of KMT rules, Lee has promised to stump for legislative candidates from the new political party, called the Taiwan Solidarity Union. Although displeased, the KMT has avoided confronting Lee, as he enjoys extensive support among grassroots supporters, particularly in the south.
"The so-called `Lee way' never existed," said KMT lawmaker Chu Fong-chi (¦¶»ñªÛ), repeating a standard party line in addressing Lee's drift toward the DPP.
"The KMT has always built its policies around the teachings of founding father Dr Sun Yat-sen (®]¤¤¤s)," Chu said.
Aware that Lee supporters identify more with the DPP than the KMT, the party has increasingly become more pro-China. "The KMT can never out-compete the DPP if it makes localization its top appeal for the year-end elections," said John Chang (³¹§µÄY), former KMT secretary-general and foreign minister.
Chang, who is eyeing a legislative seat from the southern district of Taipei City, said it was disunity rather than the party's failure to "localize" that cost the KMT the presidency last year.
Frankly, anyone who continually blurs the moral distinction between the bloodiest dictatorship in history and the United States of America is not worth talking to.
Look, it's a fact that most Taiwanese think Tibet is a part of China for the same reason that most Chinese in general think of Tibet as part of China, which is that Tibet became a part of China about 800 years ago. If most Taiwanese themselves think of Tibet as part of China, then it only goes to show the unity with which all Chinese think of Tibet as part of China, which strengthens China's claim on Tibet.
Factually, China's been a part of China (for a better part of a century) than N. America has been a part of the United States.
If you're so concerned about Tibetans, why don't you similarly advocate the return of N. America to the Native Americans. That would make you and most other Americans seem less hypocritical in Chinese eyes.
I meant to say, "Factually, Tibet has been a part of China for the better part of a millenium than N. America has been part of the United States, which is factually true.
Hahaha, the poll was was Taiwanese poll! At least get your facts right.
Chipman, stop wasting badnwidth.
And try to actually read things.
I wrote:
the New Party can barely get one percent and there thay are saying 47 percent support them
I would assume you know, but you ChiComs are amazingly poorly informed even in your own propaganda, the New Party are a Taiwan based party.
See, you think you can fool people and you can I'm sure in a lot of places where they are not familiar with the issues and players and current event.
Here your fangpi is obvious.
Clinton supporters and other liberals have done the same thing here for years as well.
Where did I claim anything about the New Party or that 47% of the public supports them? I said a recent poll (not conducted by the New Party but by a civilian organization) in Taiwan showed 47% support for China's "one country, two systems" formula. Are you not aware of this and other recent polls which show greater support in Taiwan for that formula?
Frankly, anyone who continually blurs the moral distinction between the bloodiest dictatorship in history and the United States of America is not worth talking to.
Yes. Very true.
That approach is standard ChiCom propaganda operation and too many US foreign policy experts do it too.
His blurs here are mirrorred by his blurs involving facts and information. He wants to make people waste time refuting him point by point.
That is a standard disruptor practice that is used by liberals all the time.
What I have always liked about Free Republic is that it knows what and who it is and doesn't put up with such tripe.
Huh, it's you who's spreading clearly erroneous information by saying the New Party conducted any poll at all. Where did you even get the idea that the New Party conducted any poll???? It's was a private, civilian research group that conducted the poll!
Fine, we'll direct a spare nuke to Sydney. The Freepers in North Australia will do a fine job of restructuring whats left.
Hey, what about us Freepers in the West?
Or is it noose?
Where did I claim anything about the New Party or that 47% of the public supports them? I said a recent poll (not conducted by the New Party but by a civilian organization)
Chippy, it was done by the New Party.
If you really are who you say you are, which I doubt, you are being sold a bill of goods. You probably heard this "info" from some ChiCom buffoon.
Trust me.
If you really are who you say you are, you are unaware of the history, the subtleties, the players and just about everything.
If you are not aware it was the New Party running that poll, then you really are not knowledgeable to be making the pronouncements you are making.
If you are not just another ChiCom spewer (which I think you are, obviously) you really know very little.
If you really would like to talk about this issue, it would be fun.
But you are simply spewing bogus nonsense.
In the grand scheme of things, Australia doesn't even rate a mention. Who needs them?
You obviously know little of Australia's role in intelligence gathering for the US, and it's proposed role in the future Missile Defense Intiative. Have you ever heard of Pine Gap?
Show me your evidence that the poll was conducted by the New Party. Just today, I read the article about it and the article named the civilian organization which conducted the poll, and it was definitely not "New Party" or anything close to that! The name of the organization had about 3-4 separate words in it. I will try to find it for you. In the meantime, show me your link that says the the New Party conducted the poll.
Show me your evidence that the poll was conducted by the New Party.
Why?
I've been here for almost three years, presenting info and discussing the subject.
You come here a couple days ago and begin spewing misinformation.
I'll make a deal with you. I show you and then you leave? OK?
Australia has its fair share of Chinese too.
If it ever boiled down to it, and there really was a fight, the land of OZ would back us I think. Ozzies are generally loyal to the people they like. They are straight forward (sometimes reeal straight forward if you know what I mean.) Sometimes they will even tell you any and everything they had happen to them in the past month down to the smallest detail all within the first 15 minutes of meeting them on the train :) Colorful people they are.
To come out, right now, in this situation and say "yeah, we'll kick their @ss!" would be viewed as an inflammatory statement.
There is no need creating unnessesary problems that may effect all types of things.
Hello?
I show you, you leave, OK?
Ok, deal
Well, where's your evidence?
Aussies realize that they are a speck of white, western culture in a sea of yellow and are preparing themselves for what they see as an eventual submission to Asians, especially the Chinese, instead of maintaining their cultural roots and western identity. This is unfortunate and suicidal since those whom they seek to appease don't give a damn about them or their overtures to concession. Hell, the Chinese don't even have respect and consideration for their own people, much less what they consider invaders in their sphere of influence. Add about 250,000,000 or so Indonesians sitting right on top of them. I think the Aussies better reconsider their distain for the USA and the western allies or they might be the next Taiwan.
Australia has lots of Taiwanese, especially in the Chinabrook, I mean CherryBrook area of Sydney.
For all you people who have never been to Cherry Brook, it is a fairly high class neighborhood.
A whole lot of rich Hong Kong established themselves in Australia before the handover too. It says a whole lot about how much they trust the CCP.
There is also a large group of Mainlanders there, primarily poor people who left after the 1989 thing. They left with a bad impression, most of them.
The Taiwan and Hong Kong businessmen have a lot of money flowing through Australia.
Ok, deal
OK, bye bye.
Copyright 2001 Central News Agency
Central News AgencyJuly 14, 2001, Saturday
LENGTH: 560 words
HEADLINE: HIGH SUPPORT FOR ONE COUNTRY, TWO SYSTEMS' HAS NO CREDIBILITY: DPP
BYLINE: By Lilian Wu
DATELINE: Taipei, July 14
BODY:
The ruling Democratic Progressive Party described as "untrustworthy" a poll unveiled Saturday by the tiny opposition pro-unification New Party that showed nearly half of the respondents support the "one country, two systems" pattern.
Lin Feng-hsi, party caucus whip of the DPP, said the results of the poll released by NP Legislator Elmer Feng were "without credibility, and could not be trusted."
Several months ago, the Cabinet-level Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) unveiled a similar poll that showed only 15 percent of the respondents supported the "one country, two systems" formula touted by mainland China as a system for Beijing rule over Taiwan.
Recent polls by several local media have shown that support for the system has exceeded 30 percent, but according to the latest NP poll the support is as high as 47 percent, to the surprise of many analysts.
Lin pointed out that past polls have shown that 70 percent of the people are opposed to "one country, two systems" and questioned the big gap between the results of those polls and that of Feng's.
DPP Legislator Lin Cho-shui said that Feng is "distinctive in his words and deeds" and added that he is more inclined to believe the MAC poll results. He also noted that the wording of the NP poll could have swayed the results.
The poll, conducted by the Public Poll Foundation July 9-11 at the commission of Feng, collected 1,000 effective samples and had a margin of error of 3.16 percent.
The poll found that 47.5 percent of the respondents could accept the "one country, two systems" model for cross-strait relations, while 39.4 percent could not accept the model.
The respondents were asked if they would accept the system if Beijing and Taipei could reach agreement guaranteeing that the economy and life in Taiwan would remain unchanged for 50 years, whereupon the support rate reached even higher -- to 59.3 percent -- compared with 29.3 percent who said that they could not accept it.
Chinese Culture University Professor Chen Yu-chun said that the high support rate may due to the rapid economic development in mainland China, in contrast with the chaotic political and economic situation after the inauguration of President Chen Shui-bian's administration.
Scholar Tim Ting also said that the high support rate is an illustration of a "marginalized" and "hollowed out" Republic of China.
Asked about their reasons for accepting the "one country, two systems" model, some 45.5 percent said that it would "help salvage Taiwan's economy." In a multiple choice selection, 45.7 percent said that it would "end the fighting between the two sides over the past five decades," while 44.3 percent said that Taiwan could not possibly win even if it sticks to its guns. Some 30.1 percent said that "the alliance" between President Chen and former President Lee Teng-hui could push Taiwan further toward Taiwan independence.
Asked which political parties are more in favor of the "one country, two systems" model, 34.9 percent, 39.9 percent and 31.6 percent, respectively, of the respondents answered the Kuomintang, People First Party, and NP, while those who answered the ruling Democratic Progressive Party only accounted for 12.3 percent.
Copyright 2001 Singapore Press Holdings Limited
The Straits Times (Singapore)July 18, 2001, Wednesday
SECTION: Prime News, Pg. 4
LENGTH: 468 words
HEADLINE: More Taiwan support now for unification
BYLINE: Lawrence Chung, Straits Times Taiwan Bureau
BODY:
Nervousness about future a reason why polls show more in favour of "one nation, two systems" formula
TAIPEI -- Taiwanese support for cross-strait unification under China's "one country, two systems" formula has been rising steadily over the past year in what analysts said was due to growing nervousness about Taiwan's future.
Recent opinion polls by news organisations have shown that about 30 per cent of Taiwanese support the model -- an increase of 10 percentage points over their previous polls.
A similar survey by legislator Elmer Fung of the opposition New Party said 47.5 per cent supported the unification model.
Beijing has said Taiwan's capitalist system would stay unchanged after unification, under the same formula that it held out to absorb Hongkong and Macau.
The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), Taiwan's top mainland policy planning body, yesterday disputed the legislator's figure, calling it "incredible".
But the council's statistics have also revealed greater support among Taiwanese for "one country, two systems", although the figures were lower.
Its latest poll held between July 6 and 9 showed that 13.3 per cent of 1,100 respondents would accept having Taiwan become "a local government, that it is under Chinese rule and no longer exists as the "Republic of China' ".
While the figure represented a drop from the 16.1-per-cent result recorded in a similar poll in March, the support level has been rising.
In April last year, shortly after Mr Chen Shui-bian of the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party won the presidential election, a MAC poll showed 9.3 per cent support for the "one country, two systems" formula.
The figure rose to 12.2 per cent the next month.
MAC vice-chairman Lin Chong-pin, denying that there had been a marked increase in the number of supporters for China's unification model, said figures gathered by his council had shown no obvious "structural change" in the past decade.
Support levels had remained in the single-digit range between Jan 1999 and April last year, he said.
On why figures differed markedly between the government and private polls, Mr Lin said the private pollsters had failed to warn respondents that Taiwan would be downgraded into a local government under Beijing's formula.
Analysts said the trend reflected a growing nervousness about Taiwan's future, with Taiwanese feeling disillusioned about deteriorating economic conditions and dissatisfied with the government's performance.
"People have lost confidence in the future of society here," said political scientist Lu Ya-li.
Taiwan's stock market index has shed nearly 50 per cent over the past year, economic growth is expected to drop below 3 per cent from last year's 6 per cent, and the jobless rate is at a record high.
Chippy, feel free to say one last goodbye post.
So long Chipman.
tall I love these newcomers that know everything, just ask them and they will tell you.
Yeah, but I have a feeling he or his clone will be back in a day or two with a new name, but same old song and dance.
I am also sure that some of the PRC loyalists around Sydney were pretty mad about the whole spy plane thing.
They got upset over the Aussies throwing that whole boat thing in there...
This 'could split' thing is just covering the Aussies butts for the time being and not rocking the boat just yet. Thats all.
Good night.
To chippy, wan an.
That whole New Party "lets unify" group is dumb.
Sorry, I was just kidding about your deal because it was actually totalitarian on your part to request what you requested. Who cares if you've been on this board for 3 years? Does that give you rights above and beyond others? Why would you even want to shut me down in the first place? Don't you believe in free speech or the Constitution?
I agree you are right about the poll being commissioned by the New Party. But there's no reason to discount the poll since the respondents did respond the way they did, and the question asked was not deceptive. "Do you favor "one country, two systems" if China preserves Taiwan's way of life for the next 50 years? 47.5% responded with a "Yes." Importantly, other polls also showed a greater percentage of Taiwanese nowadays in support of "one country, two systems" including the government's own polls.
I'm beginning to think tallhappy and super175 are the same.
Hmm, tallhappy, I'm glad you tried to make that deal with me. It shows I've hit a nerve. The truth hurts, doesn't it? I'm glad I've provoked your totalitarian tendency. It's revealing.
kudos chipman. there are a lot of misconceptions about China fueled by the media and government propaganda, and i'm glad that you're trying to dispel them. the situation with Taiwan is not as dire as the US media plays it up to be, and the use of force by China is extremely unlikely. unofficial social and economic reunification is and has been occuring. billions of Taiwan's $$$'s flow into China yearly, and almost 25% of Taiwan's population has visited the mainland.
I'll just bump this.... these new arrivals? *Some* must be legitimate conservatives/Libertarians.....
YUP. Great Wall or a good imitation of him.
ESAD chipman!
You are a damn liar. You are Chinese. No American working there would care about all the political details and pro Chinese propaganda you are spinning out. You are Chinese and just practicing your English here. Testing your lies out on us.
F you and f Red China
Sorry, I was just kidding about your deal
You mean lying.
Sad and pathetic.
Also typical communist.
BUMP !To ALL your posts!!!!!!!
I think we have some wolves in sheeps clothing here. But TRUTH sees through lies, and those that truly can see the truth KNOW !
Thank you ChaseR !
Thanks for the flag. Communists of the world, save your propaganda for the uninformed masses. Clinton, Australian-Com., doesn't matter...if you're pro-Communism, you are anti-American and we will fight your PR war even if our numbers are small and the Commies own the microphones. We will build our own.
Uh, does the U.S. spy on China? Don't most countries spy on "each other?"
Yeah Old Lady, I see what you mean. Our Commie noodle pal, chipman, won't respond to my direct references to Chung, Huang, and Trie....bribing bastard scumbag Clinton.
(chipman, we all know about spying - I'm asking for your opinion on HOW the three clowns above were able to so easily infiltrate the White House - -get back with me when your ready to discuss this facet of the filthbag Communists spying.)
Chipman, below is my previous post; I now ask, would you please elaborate on my questions posied in it:
(notice I substituted the word "military" - with spying)
***
"But let's hurriedly skip over the 'term' spying- and get on with asking you chipman, do you agree with the way the Scumbag Communist China - stole ALL of the United States nuclear secrets - with which they have now integrated them into their "military?"
Chipman, to further clarify, I'd prefer you make your copious replies in as many of the Clinton aiding and abetting espionage threads as you can. (you might want to read all of Chinagate material posted by Alamo-Girl -too bring you up to date)
Now, repeating, concentrate on pensive elaboration - -
with specific reference to:
- - - Why you think it was so easy for Huang, Trie and Chung to bribe filthbag Bill Clinton.(you may begin in the following thread, see you there:
TERRY MCAULIFFE - DNC CHAIRMAN - WAS KEY DEFENDENT IN LORAL SHAREHOLDERS CASE ie. CHINAGATE
[
Reply |
Private Reply | To 93 | Top | Last ]
Chipman, while I have the floor to myself here, let me clue you in to another devastating thread ie. Senator Inhofe's direct allegations of Bill Clinton's aiding and abetting espionage. Now remember, we're past you being mentally lazy - when you post in the following particular thread, I want you to first discuss all the many reasons "Why" you think Clinton and the DNC were such easy espionage marks from 1995 - present. (as the weeks go by, we can discuss each allegation, line by line, now let's get started)
THE CLINTON NATIONAL SECURITY SCANDAL AND COVERUP
Senator James Inhofe
June 23, 1999
[
Reply |
Private Reply | To 94 | Top | Last ]
sorry for the double posts everyone, but I didn't want Mr Chipman fail to find the above threads.
Bump
back to ya
"Great Wall or a good imitation of him."
Well -it's been a couple days; chipman not in sight. Looks like the Communist elite are not pleased with chipman's argumentative abilities....so, I guess they'll be some lagtime before we get our "next version" of Great Wall.
When 10,000 Taiwanese are moving to China every day starting new businesses on the mainland, marrying mainland wives...
Now I know you're tripping on opium. The mainland has a shortage of women - that is unless you are saying that 80% of the mainland men are homos, and besides, who would want a mainland woman when compared to the beautiful, fine featured Taiwanese women, they are butt ugly?
It the PLA makes a move on Taiwan, we need to nuke Beijing into a glass parking lot, but until then, we need to continue boycotting all Chinese goods, and stay out of WalMarts, as they sell so much of that cheap junk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |