Seditious Acts

Saturday's Taiwan News reported on a ceremony marking the 17th anniversary of the death of Deng Nan-jung, a Taiwanese democracy advocate.  Deng was apparently the editor of a weekly magazine, "Era of Liberty", when it published a hypothetical constitution for a Taiwanese republic.  For this, the KMT shut the magazine down, and issued a subpoena for him to answer charges of sedition.  Rather than comply, Deng committed suicide by lighting a few barrels of gasoline in his office.

Sedition charges.  For PROPOSING a new constitution.  And only 17 years ago.  It's easy for the world (and me!) to forget how recently stuff like that was happening here.

Speaking of sedition, the March 22nd edition of the Taipei Times had a letter to the editor with a couple of intriguing paragraphs in it:

...in his interview with [Taiwanese TV network] TVBS on Feb. 28, [KMT leader] Ma said that he suggested the EU consider lifting the arms embargo on China during his recent visits to London and Brussels.  (Emphasis added)

[...]

We...demand that Ma explain why he initiated the discussion of lifting the arms embargo on China in Europe, while in Taiwan his party has repeatedly blocked weapons purchases from the US.

First of all, can anyone confirm that this is true?  I have no interest in spreading falsehoods about Ma Ying-jeou, and if I find out this is BS, then I'll HAPPILY correct it in a new post.  Because the man either said on national television that he lobbied the EU to arm Taiwan's enemy, or he didn't.

If it IS true, then decide for yourself which of the two cases outlined here truly represents an act of sedition.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE (Apr 10/06):  Thanks to Tim Maddog for finding the link to the letter to the Taipei Times.  It's now included in the post.

He was also able to find a transcript of the TVBS interview, and included an excerpt in his comments.  His English translation can be found here.

UPDATE #2 (Apr 10/06):  It seems as though Ma didn't "lobby" the EU to remove the arms embargo on China, but he did provide them with conditions for the embargo's removal (ie: improved human rights conditions in China and "peaceful development" of cross-strait relations).

The tone of the speaker is EVERYTHING in this case.  When asked about whether the embargo should be lifted, did Ma say, "No"...or "HELL NO"?

That makes a big difference.

(I'd be willing to guess that Ma's response to the question was exceptionally mild.  To date, his  harshest criticism of China's Anti-Secession Law has been to say that it was "unnecessary" and "unwise".  Really, does he kiss his mother with that mouth?)

Secondly, I would like to know whether Ma helpfully offered the Europeans those conditions on his own initiative, or whether he gave those answers while being pressed.  If it was the former, then he probably earned a few brownie points in Beijing for giving them an out.  If the latter, then perhaps his answer was foolish, but not malicious.

The reason why I say it was foolish is that proposed conditions for removing the embargo ought to be specific and difficult to meet.  Ma's criteria however, are vague, and therefore too easily obtainable.  Think about the human rights condition:  If China frees a couple of Falun Gong members, won't European merchants of death be tempted to point to that as evidence that human rights are improving?  As for "peaceful development of cross-strait relations", would Taipei accepting a couple of pandas qualify?  Ma set the bar far too low, and didn't even suggest that China should become more democratic.  His little performance may not have been seditious, but it wasn't exactly a vigorous defense of Taiwan's interests, either.

Comments

[Tim Maddog]

Chang-cen Ho's letter is online here:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2006/03/22/2003298634

Here's the transcript of the February 28 TVBS interview of Ma Ying-jeou:
Part 1
http://www.tvbs.com.tw/news/news_list.asp?no=vivi20060228223841
Part 2
http://www.tvbs.com.tw/news/news_list.asp?no=vivi20060228224302

The arms embargo comes up in Part 2. Here's the key section:
- - -
國民黨主席馬英九：「我後來跟英國的官員，跟歐盟的官員談，他們都不是這樣看的，他們認為我們現在跟大陸，這樣的和解方式是對的，這樣可以使得區域的緊張減緩，而且我還跟他們講我說，歐盟要不要這個，停止對於中國大陸的武器禁運，這個ａｒｍｓ ｅｍｂａｒｇｏ，一方面他要看大陸人權的發展，二方面也應該看看兩岸在兩岸和平上，努力的進展如何，他們聽了覺得還有點道理，因為他們當初本來想要有人，有的國家想要解除禁運，但是因為..因為大陸又制定了反國家分裂法，所以他們決定暫時不要做，那我就把這個其實這個我覺得這個那個BBC的記者，他純粹是從一個節目的這種，火爆性的角度在問..，所以很尖銳對話，就是要製造尖銳對話的氣氛，這樣才有看頭，但是實際上就兩岸關係來講，像這樣的問是表示他對於兩岸的情況其實是滿懵懂的。」
- - -

[Tim Maddog]

I've gone over the transcript a couple of times with my wife's help to make sure I didn't miss anything before I posted any kind of translation. (My reading didn't seem to quite match what Ho said, so I wanted to double check.)

The main point Ma makes in the quoted segment is that with certain conditions in place -- those being "China improving its human rights situation" and "the peaceful development of cross-strait relations" (Can anyone say "snowballs in hell"?) -- he thinks the weapons embargo should be lifted.

Now that Ma's KMT (Killed Many Taiwanese) have blocked Taiwan's *defensive* weapons purchases 50 times instead of directly asking their "minor enemy" (China) to *reduce* its ever-increasing military threats against Taiwan (the KMT's "major enemy" being the DPP), that makes him a Super-hypocrite as well as an enemy of Taiwan.

[The Foreigner]

Thanks to both you & your wife for clearing some of this up for me. Don't know how I missed this in the news a month ago, but I sure appreciate being brought up to speed.