Beijing concerned

Ma's recent statement that he would "bring up the 92 consensus less, and talk more about 'One China, two interpretations'" is likely to confuse Beijing some and could force Ma to raise the 92 consensus more often, at least.

The article linked above quotes an unnamed professor as guessing Beijing fears Ma taking a page from Lee Teng-hui's book and trying to think of relations as "a special state-to-state relationship."

Beijing has still refused to comment at all lately on 'One China, two interpretations.' Just do a google search for 一中各表 on say, Xinhua.org. You won't find much. I think they're going to try the tactic of only saying '92 consensus,' which they will define as "One China" and which Ma will define as "One China, two interpretations." I'm not sure how well that will work in practice.

Lee: Unification/Independence confrontation over

Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), former president and now spiritual leader to the Taiwan Solidarity Union, has made a prophetic-sounding statement in the wake of the TSU's total defeat in the election.

First, the TSU's next moves: dissolve the Central Standing Committee, have a re-registration drive for party members, create a 'Friends of the TSU' organization for those who are sympathetic but not interested in joining the party itself, and switch models to a "soft party."

For those unclear on the soft party/hard party distinction: the major parties in the US are soft. The party apparatus at a national level can influence candidates and members only in a limited manner. Party membership cannot be revoked for voting against the party line -- whether you're a legislator or a citizen voting in the general election. And in general, candidates are ultimately responsible to their constituency, meaning that the Democratic Party of California is very different from the Democratic Party in Kansas or Alaska, just as New York Republicans are quite a different lot than Texas Republicans.

Hard parties, like the ones in Israel, Russia and the KMT and DPP themselves, have a much stronger and centralized decision making apparatus with greater accountability for party members and legislators to the party's central committee.

I heartily endorse the TSU's decision to become a soft party and hope very much the DPP consider the same, but I doubt that will happen very much.

President Lee Teng-hui, in public remarks following the TSU's meeting, said that "the era of confrontation over unification or independence is over," and that what Taiwan needs most right now is a good opposition party which would monitor the government.

I think the unification/independence issue is about to get complicated enough that it won't much resemble the old era, but considering it's an unsettled issue, I don't see how it can be over.

Lee-Ma meeting this afternoon

Will update when there are details. And on the unrelated topic of Iraq, I found this fact about Basra a good indication of just how bad the situation is:

The division of the spoils among the armed groups [in Basra] is often quite specific. Fadhila controls the electricity sector and shares power with the Mahdi at the ports; Dawa and Fadhila have a strong grip in the lucrative southern oil operations, and a different branch of Dawa — the one to which Mr. Maliki belongs — holds sway at the Basra airport.

Lee's just full of surprises

President-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is unlikely to bring Taiwan close to Beijing any time soon as the Chinese Communist Party does not trust him, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) said.

Speaking in an interview with Japan's Sankei Shimbun newspaper, Lee dismissed suggestions that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) member Ma would integrate Taiwan with China.

"Taiwan will not be taken by China so easily. Why? Actually the the Chinese Communist Party does not trust Mr Ma from the bottom of its heart," he said in the interview published yesterday.

"I'm not in a position to elaborate but he is influenced very strongly by the United States," the 85-year-old Lee said of Ma.

The former president said Ma "can be self-righteous but is also modern."

Lee had supported Ma's rival, Democratic Progressive Party candidate Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) in the presidential election even though Ma served as justice minister in the 1990s under Lee's rule.

Lee also doubted that China's crackdown on Tibet was a decisive factor in the election, saying that people did not want to provoke Beijing.

"Would it do Taiwan any good if we supported Tibet when Taiwan's safety is not guaranteed? No," Lee said.

Here are some of the articles from the Sankei Shimbun (産経新聞) related to the Lee interview:

日台関係「智恵生かしたい」　李登輝氏会見要旨

「中台統一」加速はない　李登輝前総統

　対中融和策を推進する国民党の８年ぶりの政権奪還で、台湾が中国の統一工作に取り込まれるとの指摘に ついて、「（戦後の）台湾の帰属問題は不明瞭（めいりよう）だと中国はよく研究している。簡単に統一はできない。しばらくは安全だ」と話し、米国の介入を 念頭に、懸念を一（いつ）蹴（しゆう）した。また「馬氏は米国寄り。中台統一に持ち込むことはない」とした。

「敵とは交渉せず」　中国、外交哲学貫きダライ・ラマとの対話拒否

Lee Teng-hui

Long ago I predicted that if Hsieh looked likely to lose, Lee Teng-hui would pass away just before the 2008 presidential election, since it is his last political card to play and it could save the greens.

Irrational? Sure. A cold and disturbing statement on my part? Probably. But most importantly, unlikely.

He has plenty of fight left in him.

KMT sold property to cover Lee's bad bills?

Pro-blue United Daily News reports an unnamed "high KMT official" today that the main reason Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) assets went from the Feb. 1987 level of NT$ 91.8 billion (US$2.79 billion) to the mere NT$31.1 billion (US$948 million) of the Ma Ying-jeou era is due to -- you guessed it -- former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).

The unnamed official, described as a "core individual" or key player (核心人士), explains that the main reason the property had to be sold was that Lee Teng-hui had left the party with about NT$40 billion in questionable accounts (壞帳), about half of the KMT's total assets at that time.

The source further expresses his believe that Lee Teng-hui had personally planned to pulverize the party property. (Alliteration, here I am!) He gives examples of these questionable accounts, including debts from contracts that went over budget in previous infastructure construction. He also admited other causes for the loss of property, including the losses (not revenue) of most remaining property and the costs of an increasing number of retired party workers, which has cost NT$10 billion alone in recent years.

Update: Whoah, looks like it could be more serious than that -- KMT lawyers will discuss if Lee Teng-hui should be sued over this, but so far they do not plan to press ahead with a lawsuit immediately. Wang Jin-pyng had the best remark, asking if the KMT actually intends to "sue Lee" or "respect Lee," the policy presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou announced this week (but, to be fair, the media coined the "respect Lee" phrase themselves).

====================

I'd like to stake out my position. Teng-hui was a crook as clever and conniving as the best of them. He does whatever he wants when he wants, and thankfully that benefited democratic change. I also happen to believe his leaving Lian Chan in charge -- but not his break with James Soong -- was planned and meant to hurt the KMT for the long run. And I think Wang Jin-pyng is his remaining agent, whose goal is to finish what Lee started and have the KMT become a truly nativized party by adopting the principal of Taiwanese self-determination.

I also can accept the credibilty of the sources charge. If I were Lee and wanted to "right a few wrongs" while I was in charge, this would certainly be one way to handle the party property issue. Another way would be to sell off vast amounts of questionably acquired property before anyone could stop it, so that the party comes away with at least some cash on hand, which Lee, Lian and Ma all did.

But I also am shocked by the total lack of self-reflection by the party on this issue, its total unwillingness to accept the illegitimacy of how it acquired and maintained its assets. And I am wondering, at what point will the KMT be able to blame themselves for their problems, instead of Lee and Chen?