President Chen Shui-bian's
Press conference
August 28, 2000
Acting Secretary-General Chen’s
Remarks:
Mr. President, Deputy Secretary-General Chien, Ladies and
Gentlemen from the Media:
Good morning!
First of all, I would like to welcome
each and every one of you to the Office of the President for today’s
press conference.
As you know, this press conference was
originally scheduled to be held on August 26, when the president
returned from his trip to the Caribbean, Central America, and
Africa. However, Taiwan was struck by Typhoon Bilis, the strongest
typhoon to have hit Taiwan in a decade. The president was very
concerned about the damage and, therefore, decided to return one day
earlier. President Chen was back in Taiwan at 3:00 in the afternoon
on August 25, and immediately visited the disaster areas in Nantou
County. On the second day, the president continued his inspection
tour in the Hualien and Taitung areas. This is why the press
conference was postponed until this date, and we would like to
apologize to the media for any inconvenience caused by the
postponement.
I am sure that all of you are interested
in hearing the results of President Chen’s first overseas “trip
of democracy, diplomacy, and friendship” since his
inauguration, as well as the president’s views on major
domestic issues. Now, let us welcome the president to make some
opening remarks, after which he will answer your questions.
President Chen’s Opening Remarks
Acting Secretary-General Chen, Deputy Secretary-General Chien,
and Friends from the Media:
Good morning!
The 13-day “trip of democracy,
diplomacy, and friendship” has ended successfully. I want to
thank our friends in the media for their company and advice, as well
as EVA Air for its chartered service. I also want to thank our
colleagues in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and our embassies and
overseas representative offices for their meticulous preparations. I
especially want to thank the United States and our six diplomatic
allies for their kind arrangements facilitating this visit. Of
course, my special appreciation also goes to the legislators from
different parties as well as the business leaders taking this trip
with us.
This tour has proved that the worries and
anxieties expressed prior to the trip were unnecessary. During our
trip overseas, the domestic political situation was stable and the
government functioned smoothly. The cross-strait relationship, a
source of concern, did not become tense or worse because of an
overseas trip by our head of state. Many had expected some
unfavorable comments, actions, or conclusions emanating from the PRC’s
Beidaihe conference, but this view proved to be unfounded. Although
we cannot say much about accomplishments on this trip, for me
personally, for Taiwan, and for the Republic of China, we gained
many valuable experiences. For many people, this trip provided an
opportunity for adjusting and changing their concepts or ways of
thinking.
This trip has been comforting in some ways
and touching in others, and there has, of course, been some change
in my own thinking. In the past we did not have a very good
understanding of our allies. This time, we had the opportunity to
truly understand our nation’s diplomatic situation and further
realize the efforts and contributions made by our foreign service
people on the diplomatic fronts. What gives me joy and comfort is
that I have withstood the rigors of the journey. Before we arrived
home, I especially asked our accompanying medical team how many
people had sought their help during our 13-day trip, and I was told
that more than 60 people, of which 60 percent were members of the
media, had visited the medical team. I did not have to see a doctor
on this trip, nor did I trouble any member of the medical team. I
left home happily and have returned safely. Although I suffered from
jet lag or was a little unaccustomed to the food during the trip, I
am pleased to say that I have remained active and healthy.
Before the trip, we never imagined that
these friendly countries would give us such a warm welcome and so
much attention. We were very deeply moved. Take President Hipolito
Mejia of the Dominican Republic for example. While accepting
congratulations from the foreign delegations [after his
inauguration], he asked me to join him in receiving congratulations.
President Mejia also introduced me to other delegations. Nicaraguan
President Arnoldo Aleman further surprised us by making an exception
to see us off at the airport. It was unprecedented. Even when
President Clinton visited Nicaragua there was no such exception.
Costa Rican President Miguel Angel Rodriguez not only invited us to
his home for breakfast, but also introduced us to his party’s
presidential candidate. There were other things that deeply
impressed us. When President Idriss Déby of Chad learned that
the place we were supposed to stay lacked some necessary facilities,
he especially let us stay at his residence. He then moved to stay at
the presidential office. We learned later that Mrs. Déby had
sent some people to renovate and decorate the residence so that we
would feel more at home. Now, I would like to again express my
heartfelt respect and gratitude to all of them for their
hospitality.
I would especially like to mention how
people here had described conditions in those countries. In fact,
such things as sanitation, food, or housing were not as worrisome as
imagined or reported. I live a very simple life and feel at home
wherever I am. I am not finicky about food or the place I live in.
However, before we left for the trip, many misleading reports
frightened the delegation members. Nevertheless, they also enjoyed
their visit to these countries. Once we were there, nothing unusual
happened. I believe we did not make an effort to understand these
countries. Despite the fact that they have been our friendly allies
for many years, we were not familiar with them, and there were
misunderstandings and barriers. If we carefully compare our life
here in Taiwan with that in these countries, we have to admit that
we are very lucky. We should cherish our achievements and quality of
life, none of which was easily attained. In spite of the fact that
we are often dissatisfied and the government has not yet performed
as well as expected, we are truly one of the luckier nations in the
world. As a member of the international community, every nation is
great in its own way, and every people is indispensable. Every one
is equal and important.
In today’s world, despite such
differences as skin color or the level of development, all countries
are important and equally worthy of respect. Gambian President Yahya
Jammeh said that, although his country is small, it has a loud
voice. Burkina Faso President Blaise Compaore said that his country
has nothing, but work. I believe that every nation and race has its
strengths worthy of respect. Last night, my wife told me that when
the first lady of Paraguay visited Taiwan, my wife hosted a banquet
to honor her. During the banquet, the visiting first lady told my
wife that the Paraguay government would definitely speak on behalf
of Taiwan, for the people of Taiwan joining the United Nations and
many other international organizations. My wife felt so concerned
that we do not have the international status and recognition enjoyed
by Paraguay. They have national dignity and confidence, whereas we
must rely on other nations to speak for us, to fight for the justice
we deserve. Similarly, when we visited three nations in Central
America and three nations in West Africa, these countries all
reiterated that they would speak for the ROC and ask for justice.
Are we truly more advanced than other countries? Don’t we have
weaknesses compared to other nations? Indeed, some nations are small
or poor, but have loud voices. Where is our voice? I personally feel
that a state visit gives us a good opportunity to realize the
importance of international status and recognition as a nation.
Many people here do not realize the
national flag is important or that the national anthem means much.
But, on May 20, when A-mei led in singing the national anthem, she
touched the hearts of the audience. I believe many people shed tears
and realized that we could sing the anthem of Taiwan so beautifully.
For decades, many people did not appreciate the importance and
beauty of our national anthem. When I stood on the rostrum at
national airports with leaders of friendly nations and listened to
the national anthem of Taiwan played by their bands, I was deeply
moved and even stirred with pride. Only then did I feel the
importance of our country, the importance of our country’s
being recognized, and the importance of our country’s
international profile. I do not think all of my compatriots could
fully understand and appreciate my experience, or feel the same way
I did.
During this trip, we not only proclaimed
our country’s sovereignty and consolidated friendships with our
diplomatic allies, but also put Taiwan on the world stage. We want
to see the whole world and let the whole world see Taiwan and the
democratic achievements and economic prosperity resulting from
several decades of effort by the 23 million people of Taiwan. We
want to offer humanitarian assistance and compassion to the world,
which is our responsibility and privilege. This is what Mr.
Alexander Shafer, president-designate of Kiwanis International, said
this morning when I met him and his wife: “Serving people is
not a responsibility but a privilege.” If we help other people,
it is not a responsibility. It is a privilege. However, if we do not
even do our duty, can we enjoy the privilege of helping others? I
really cannot imagine why some people do not agree to our providing
humanitarian assistance and economic cooperation. I often think
about my own background. As a child from a poor family, without the
assistance of relatives and friends, or money that didn’t need
to be returned, or money borrowed from friends or relatives with no
or low interest, could there be an ROC president today named Chen
Shui-bian? It was because many people helped me to stand up that I
was given the opportunity to serve the people. This is the spirit of
the “Son of Taiwan.”
Half a century ago, the United States
assisted us in building Hsiluo Bridge. When I was in the second
grade, I had the chance to drink my first cup of cow milk. It was
delicious, and it came from the United States. To me, having never
tasted cow milk, that first cup was assistance from the US and
provided by my school. Can we say that this was “money
diplomacy” by the US? American international assistance allowed
Taiwan to overcome many difficulties and stand up. Now, we are
standing tall and have the opportunity to repay the global
community. Why are we so stingy? Clearly, the United Nations
suggests that foreign aid should account for at least 0.7 percent of
a country’s GNP. Currently, the average percentage is 0.24. How
about Taiwan? Our percentage is only 0.13, half the average
percentage of the UN. Isn’t it too low? Perhaps some people
think that if we cannot implement our own social welfare programs,
how can we help other countries? We want to ask, are the American
people satisfied with their social welfare programs? Is every person
taken care of one hundred percent? I don’t think so. Several
decades ago, the US gave so much care and help to weak countries in
this world, including Taiwan. Did the American people complain about
that? Were they opposed? I have faith in the responsibility of the
global community and in humanitarian care and aid. This is an
inescapable fact: we are a member of the international community and
must do more. We can do better.
We traveled to many countries during this
trip. We saw the Gambia’s vegetable cultivation area and found
that the vegetables planted are exactly the same as those we have
here in Taiwan. This is the result of the hard work of our
agricultural technical mission stationed there. Growing vegetables
might not mean as much to Taiwan, but it means a lot to the people
of the Gambia. We also visited the Bagre farm area in Burkina Faso
and saw thousands of hectares of lush rice paddies beside the dam.
The irrigation ditches there are like the Chianan Irrigation System
near my hometown. However, developing the land is easier said than
done, as this area was covered by stones that had to be exploded
before cultivation was possible. So many members of our agricultural
technical mission stayed there for three, five, or even ten years
without getting any preventive inoculations or taking any medicine.
They work silently and contribute what they know to that place.
In Chad, we saw that Taiwan Bridge will
be opened to traffic next year. Chad has long been divided into
north and south by a river. Over the past 40 years, there has only
been a rickety one-way bridge connecting the two sides. Now the
two-way Taiwan Bridge will be opened to the public next year, and
people from the north and the south of the country will be able to
cross the bridge from both directions. As Chad President Idriss Déby
said, Taiwan Bridge not only connects south and north Chad, but also
Chad and Taiwan. It is a bridge of friendship between Chad and the
ROC. To us, it costs not much, but to Chad, it is something that
makes their lives so much easier. So, why not extend a hand of
friendship?
Travel in these countries is very
inconvenient. Before I left Chad, I had breakfast with our eight
ambassadors stationed in African nations. I told them, “The
eight of you are like the eight fairies crossing the sea. You eight
fairies crossed the South China Sea and then the Indian Ocean to
Africa. As frontline members of the diplomatic corps, you are the
greatest and have made wonderful contributions to your nation. You
should each receive a medal.” Some of them told me that they
had spent seven or nine days traveling to Chad from their respective
offices before they could meet me. They could not fly to Chad
directly, as we did by chartered flight. Before we went on our trip
overseas, we took medicine and immunization shots. But they said
that they had no vaccinations or medicine and would seek help only
after they fell ill. It was the same for our agricultural
specialists. And aren’t the medical teams just as impressive?
It seems that we have difficulty supplying the required agricultural
people. The older generation has done very well, but the younger
generation doesn’t seem to be doing as well. Can we consider “foreign
service in lieu of military service”? Can we promote a kind of “peace
corps”? Let’s take students in our agricultural colleges
for example. If they are willing to join a “peace corps,”
we can offer them foreign language and professional training,
including courses at the foreign diplomacy college to be established
by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. When they graduate, they can
join the “peace corps” or agricultural technical missions.
They will not have to serve in the military. The “peace corps”
can be an alternative to military conscription, and an alternative
foreign service. We can offer them a high salary, and perhaps they
can serve five years instead of two. After five years, they might
wish to remain on the agricultural technical missions and even start
a new career overseas. These are areas where we can dedicate our
efforts. I believe that many of our young people have such
aspirations. Helping others is helping yourself. I raise this
proposal, so we can encourage each other.
Finally, I must emphasize that although
diplomacy is important, domestic affairs are even more so. As the
president of the nation, one must see and feel the suffering of the
people. Even as I was in Africa, my heart was at home in Taiwan, and
I was concerned about the safety of the lives and property of our
people. As a traveler, who is far from home, I was worried about the
typhoon ravaging my country, and not until I was assured that
everything was all right could I be free from anxiety.
As a head of state visiting abroad, I was
required to follow international protocol. With the understanding of
the counterpart, some adjustments in the schedule could be made.
Idriss Déby, the president of Chad, told me it was best not
to pressure myself. If he were in the same situation, he would make
some adjustments to the schedule and return home at an earlier date.
I felt especially comforted by the fact that government affairs had
not been adversely affected by my trip aboard. The crises were
smoothly managed. As Typhoon Bilis was approaching, I called Premier
Tang and Vice Premier Chang, waking them up at midnight and
repeatedly exhorting them to make good preparations for the typhoon.
After the typhoon struck, I made calls and inquired about the
damage. Without the most up-to-date information and assurance of the
current situation via reports every two hours, my worries could not
be reduced. During the typhoon, I was in direct contact with the
vice president, the premier, the vice premier and the chief of
general staff eight times, and found my mind constantly on the
situation in Taiwan. I reached a decision to change my schedule and
return at an earlier date. Very soon I arrived home, saw our people
in the disaster areas, and shared their pain. But I am grateful to
the outstanding performance of our servicemen, police, firefighters,
and personnel in the weather, transportation, electricity, and water
supply bureaus and other departments. They were the first to respond
and reacted immediately. I would like to again express my thanks and
praise for their courageous work. I wish to thank Vice President Lu,
Premier Tang, Vice Premier Chang, Chief of General Staff Tang, and
related agencies for their efforts. They did an excellent job
managing emergency situations.
Yesterday, we handled the
Kaohsiung-Pingtung Bridge incident very well. Since the Pa-chang
Creek accident, we must be on full alert and must not make any
excuses or be slow to respond. We must mobilize to save lives. I
could sense that these two incidents have mobilized everyone.
However, if like yesterday, proper precautions had been made, I
believe many unfortunate situations and accidents could be
minimized. If we can prevent disasters, why shouldn’t we?
Today is the 100th day of the new
administration. In the past three months, we have had the excuse of
being the “new driver on the road.” But from now on, we
cannot use it as an excuse anymore. We must “become experienced
drivers” to meet our citizens’ great expectations. We must
work to solve the serious, chronic problems in a short period of
time. We must implement reforms and pursue progress. I believe we do
not have time to waste or procrastinate.
The neophytes in government must now
enter a new stage of experience. Such numerous trials as eliminating
“black gold” politics (organized crime and government
corruption), improving the social order, investigating the murder of
navy procurement officer Captain Yin Ching-feng, stimulating the
economy, maintaining public safety, raising the quality of life and
environmental standards, conducting reforms, promoting a multiparty
task force, strengthening the communication and coordination
mechanisms between the Legislative and Executive Yuans, and,
finally, achieving rapprochement between political parties and
coordination between the ruling and opposition parties all lie ahead
to challenge and continually test us. I would like to reiterate that
in the short time of four years, I will do my best. I would like to
remind all members of the new administration to cherish this time
and make the best of it. Running for a next term is not on our mind,
but rather fulfilling our duties and doing a good job in governing
our country. All government officials and I will show our
willingness to do things right during this term, which is far more
important than thinking about running for the next term. In the
coming four years, all government officials should be on high alert.
No laziness, hesitation, or shirking responsibility is allowed in
the new administration.
If we cannot learn fast enough to become
experienced and conduct reforms within a short period of time, the
people will not understand. If anyone in the cabinet is unable to
carry out reforms well, I am sorry to advise that they must be
replaced. We should not have any idea that we can leave things to
chance. There is no guarantee for anyone to stay in office for four
years. If one is not suitable in a position, the person will be
replaced. I think every cabinet member should have high
self-expectations and push themselves to excel. My philosophy is
quite simple: “I trust people I appoint, and I don’t
appoint people I distrust.” I am willing to give members of the
government an opportunity to fully demonstrate their abilities. If
anyone is unable to stay in step, does a poor job, or has no team
spirit, I must replace him. We will take the initiative and make an
all-out effort in everything, so that we won’t fail the
expectations of our fellow citizens.
I will not let you down and will work
hard. In the future, I will devote more time to domestic affairs.
Once we have stabilized cross-strait affairs and foreign relations
and enhanced the morale of our military forces, I will spend more
time and energy on domestic affairs, especially in the areas of
economic revitalization, administrative efficiency, and the
elimination of “black gold.” I will not compromise because
of ballots, nor will I be hypocritical or wishy-washy in order to be
elected the next term, otherwise, not only the people of Taiwan but
also I myself will not be satisfied. Because of the general
dissatisfaction, we have room for improvement. And because I am
dissatisfied, I will work all the more.
Thank you all once again. I hope our
friends from the media will not hesitate to give me their comments
and criticism.
Q.1
During your stay abroad, there was a major domestic issue regarding
the chairmanship of the National Unification Council. The chairman
is the president, according to the Statute for the Establishment.
What is your opinion now? On the other hand, acting
Secretary-General Chen thought that, since the Guidelines for
National Unification were made in 1989, it is time to revise them.
What is your personal opinion? In the future, how can we distinguish
between the functions and responsibilities of the National
Unification Council and those of the Multiparty Task Force?
A:
I sincerely appreciate everyone's concern and comments about the
National Unification Council, the Guidelines for National
Unification, and related issues. In my inaugural address on May 20,
2000, I already publicly declared that so long as the Communist
regime does not use military force against Taiwan, the National
Unification Council and the Guidelines for National Unification will
not be abolished. This statement has not changed. Although there are
no questions regarding abolition, there are other issues that we
must face, which cannot be avoided. As there are still many people
who are confused about these issues, I would like to take this
opportunity to give appropriate explanations and guidance.
For example,
some people misperceive the National Unification Council as the
highest policy-making and ultimate decision-making agency on
cross-strait policy. In reality, however, the National Unification
Council is simply another consultative body, much like the
Multiparty Task Force, the National Human Rights Consultation Task
Force, and the Science and Technology Consultation Task Force. All
of these organizations are merely consultative agencies to the
president. Thus, the National Unification Council is not the final
decision-making body on cross-strait issues, nor is it the highest
policy-making agency.
Another
popular misconception is the belief that the National Unification
Council is a sacred and inviolable entity. In actuality, the
Establishing Guidelines for the National Unification Council
proclaimed by the president in 1990 have been continuously revised
and were changed in 1993, 1995, and 1997. Since the Establishing
Guidelines for the National Unification Council have already been
revised three times, they are obviously not sacred or inviolable.
Members of
the National Unification Council serve for terms of one year, and
those one-year terms have now been completed. Naturally, if the
council continues to exist, we must either reappoint its members or
appoint new ones. Before the Establishing Guidelines for the
National Unification Council are abolished and before any of its
articles are changed, the second article of the Establishing
Guidelines states that the president should serve as the chairman of
the National Unification Council. This is a fact. However, I must
point out that the council is but one of several consultative
agencies to the president, none of which are led by the president.
The person in charge of the Multiparty Task Force is Lee Yuan-tseh,
the president of the Academia Sinica; and the convenor of the
National Human Rights Consultation Task Force and the Science and
Technology Consultation Task Force is Vice President Lu. In other
words, it is not an absolute necessity for the president to serve as
the chairman of a consultative agency, committee, or task force.
Thus, I have no prejudices or biases with regard to serving as the
chairman of the National Unification Council. I am willing to listen
to different views.
However, the
Multiparty Task Force is currently being actively promoted. The
first meeting will be held soon, and I will be participating to give
my encouragement and support. After all, the first article in the
Establishing Guidelines for the National Unification Council clearly
states the reason why the president established the National
Unification Council: "Under the principles of freedom and
democracy, to accelerate national unification, conduct research, and
provide consultation on guiding principles." Although its
purposes are quite clear, has it really been carried out? Under the
principles of freedom and democracy, the purpose for establishing
the National Unification Council was to accelerate national
unification. Was this policy objective carried out under the
principles of freedom and democracy? Did they get the people’s
consent and majority support? Were the procedures discussed from top
to bottom? Many different opinions have arisen on this subject that
need to be further discussed. Indeed, there are currently many
different domestic views and ideologies with regard to national
status, cross-strait relations, and Taiwan’s future, and some
of them are diametrically opposed to one another. As the president
of a democratic state, I must review all of these differing
opinions.
Thus, we
hope that the Multiparty Task Force can establish a consensus from
top to bottom amongst the government, political parties, and the
public with respect to cross-strait relations, Taiwan’s future,
our national status, and various ethnic problems. I think that the
smooth and efficient operation of the Multiparty Task Force should
be our current priority and fully support President Lee Yuan-tseh’s
direction for its future operations. I am here to appeal to our
countrymen, all parties, and all factions, to support and
participate in the Multiparty Task Force. The Multiparty Task Force
is not even operational yet. Do we really want to brush it aside so
quickly to return to the disputes of the National Unification
Council? We need to examine and face many things. For example, did
the past government follow the Guidelines for National Unification
and the National Unification Council? I think that many things have
become too holy. In fact, the main issue is not the National
Unification Council or the Guidelines for National Unification;
rather, the main issue is on practical, day-to-day operations. What
can we do?
Today, many
people can already travel to the Chinese mainland, to Shanghai or
Beijing, and talk with the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party
about cross-strait relations. Why is it that we have no way to shake
hands at home, to meet with each other to discuss national affairs,
to form a consensus between our government and political parties on
cross-strait relations? Is it possible that domestic politics are
more important than the Chinese Communists and Zhongnanhai? Thus, I
sincerely hope all parties and factions can eliminate their
prejudices to discuss national affairs, as it is not only our right
to do so, but our obligation and responsibility.
Q.2
Just now, you spoke of having high expectations of the new
government and emphasized your willingness to replace government
officials who were not performing well. Just before your return
home, however, there were already rumors of a possible partial
Cabinet reshuffle in light of some of the criticism it has received.
Attacks have been made on everything from the Cabinet’s
financial and economic policies to its crackdown on elected
representatives with ties to the underground. All have left society
with the impression that the Cabinet “roars a lot of thunder
but provides little actual rain.” Do you think there is a need
to reshuffle the cabinet at the present time and, if so, why?
A:
I emphasized earlier that I have a very simple philosophy when it
comes to appointing personnel: “Appoint a person without any
doubts, do not appoint a person if there are any doubts.” Since
the government officials have already been appointed, this means
that I do not have the slightest doubt about their abilities. I have
given them an opportunity to perform over the past three months, and
I am ready to give them even more opportunities in the future. For
instance, I hope that the financial and economic task force recently
established by the Executive Yuan will take a vigorous and
aggressive approach and not give society the impression that it is
in disarray or is lacking in direction with its economic and
financial policies. I consider this to be very important. The
government is like an enterprise: we are more concerned with team
performance than individual performance. If an individual performs
well, but the team does not, then the individual is not any better
off. However, if the team performs well, then the individual will
naturally be in a good position as well. A good team needs good
members. Thus, I believe we should give our new government—the
Tang Cabinet—more time and greater opportunities. Regarding the
problems that have occurred in the past three months, we could
possibly say that we were "new drivers on the road."
However, we cannot use this rationalization to shirk our
responsibilities in the future. Society has very high demands, and
my expectations are no less. I sincerely hope that the new
government, the Tang Cabinet, and all of the ministries and
commissions will devote their full efforts to their work. I would
like to remind our ministers and heads of commissions that three
months have passed since the new government took office. If they
have failed to push on with their work because of personnel problems
or because subordinate department heads have been unable to
coordinate their work in a united effort, then I am sorry to say
that adjustments must be made. They have to be made—without
hesitation, hypocrisy, procrastination, or delay. I hope that our
ministers and heads of commissions realize that if they want to
thoroughly implement the ideals and reforms of the new government,
then “everything will depend on human effort.” Each staff
member must put “heart” into their work; if the heart is
not in it, then adjustments must be made to the staff. I hope that
our ministers and heads of commissions will review this matter
thoroughly and make the necessary personnel adjustments. Otherwise,
we will not be able to proceed with certain matters, and by then, it
might be too late to lay blame.
Q.3
The US State Department recently issued a report on the human rights
of foreign laborers for various nations. It listed the ROC as having
the second worst record in the world. Such a record is bound to
damage our diplomatic efforts. What is your opinion on this report?
A:
It is vital that the ROC performs a serious self-examination and
reviews both the criticism and advice being given. However, I have
said that establishing a nation based on human rights will be the
goal of the new government. Furthermore, I have consistently
encouraged everyone to let the ROC on Taiwan become a new landmark
for human rights in the 21st century. While striving for this
ultimate goal, though, it is important that we sincerely confront
all of the criticisms being made to our freedom and human rights
record, as such criticism usually signifies that our measures are
insufficient. Thus, I will ask the Executive Yuan, the Council of
Labor Affairs, and all other relevant government agencies to work
together and thoroughly review the human rights situation of foreign
laborers working in the ROC, and I will demand that they make
changes to improve those conditions.
Q.4
Mr. President, when you were in the Dominican Republic, you
reiterated your resolution to dig into the Yin Ching-feng case even
though this would rock our nation to its very foundation. Is there
any progress in the case? And to what level of the military officers
will you investigate? Will it shake our national foundation to solve
this case?
A:
In order to stabilize our national foundation, we must investigate
the Yin Ching-feng case and other relevant scandals to the end. If
anything, these cases are the ones that will shake our national
foundation. If these cases are not solved, they will remain a pain
to the military. We can not let the majority of the honest and
nation- and people-loving servicemen bear the humiliation for the
misconduct of a minority of people in the military.
At the press
conference on July 31, I issued an official order to set up a
special investigation committee for the Yin case and other relevant
scandals. State Public Prosecutor-General Lu Ren-fa was appointed
the convener of this committee. The Ministry of Justice, Ministry of
the Interior, and Ministry of National Defense are also responsible
for investigating this case. The committee has been working very
hard during this past month. Papers and files relevant to the case
are so voluminous that the committee couldn’t even read them
all in one month’s time.
I would like
to affirm the efforts of every member of the committee, including
the prosecutors, members of the Investigation Bureau, police
officers, and relevant units of the military. Every one of them
worked very hard in cooperation during the past month. This is not
easy. Nor is it easy to find new clues for the case and to make new
breakthroughs in this almost “invisible” case. I am very
pleased that we have found something new and made some new
breakthroughs for the case. We did not disappoint our fellow
countrymen. I have to respect the special investigation committee as
well as the independence of the judicial system. Eliminating
organized crime and government corruption is the common aspiration
of everyone. And we have shown our respect for the independence of
the judicial system, when we were cracking down on the organized
crime and government corruption practices in the past. Similarly, we
must show the same respect to the judicial units as we did when they
cracked down on organized crime and government corruption.
Therefore, I told the special investigation committee and
Prosecutor-General Lu not to have any concerns when investigating
the Yin case. No matter how high and broad the level might be and no
matter whether those involved are still in office or retired, we
have no boundaries or limitations for investigating this case. I
told them not to worry about anything, just track it down to the
end, and not to disappoint our fellow countrymen. If we can have any
progress and new breakthroughs for such a dying case, then we can
handle any case. If we can solve the most difficult case that seems
to all to be almost impossible to solve, what case can’t we
handle?
I believe
that this is just the beginning. The investigation on the Yin case
and other relevant scandals only demonstrate our will and resolve to
eliminate organized crime and government corruption from our
society. There are still some very old cases that were already given
up by many people. For those cases, we cannot comfort ourselves by
saying that it has been so many years, all evidence has disappeared,
and there is no way to solve them. I believe that those who were
involved and have passed away will bless us from heaven. I am
confident that our fellow countrymen will also give their full
support to my new government, as well as to the special
investigation committee for the Yin case, to crack down on organized
crime and government corruption with a comprehensive effort.
Q.5
At your last press conference, you mentioned that you would
personally go to the KMT building located opposite the Office of the
President and invite KMT Chairman Lien Chan to attend a special “Bian-Lien
meeting.” Now that the KMT has already given its formal
response, has any schedule been set for such a meeting? If
successful, will a similar formula be applied to a future meeting
with Chairman James C.Y. Soong of the People First Party?
A:
I sincerely appreciate all of the comments and advice that have been
offered to both myself and the new government by people from all
walks of life, including different political parties and the media.
We especially appreciate the comments given by the KMT and have
listened to their opinions with an open mind. Indeed, with respect
to a few matters, we would particularly like to invite KMT Chairman
Lien Chan to meet with us and discuss them in person, as I hope he
can provide us with further insight into his opinions. Nevertheless,
we only have one nation and one national interest. I do not believe
any single political party would place their party's interests
before or above it. Similarly, I do not believe any political party
would place their own interests above those of the people, and the
KMT is no exception. For the sake of our nation's future, the future
of cross-strait relations, and the many initiatives and reforms that
are taking place in domestic affairs, I again invite Chairman Lien,
with utmost sincerity, to meet with me. If he does not have time
now, I can wait. If he cannot make it today, I will wait until
tomorrow; if he cannot meet me tomorrow, I will wait until the day
after; if he cannot meet this week, I will wait until next week; and
if he doesn’t have time this month, I will wait until the
following month. I can afford to wait until he has time for me to
visit him. If the KMT headquarters is not an appropriate place for
such a meeting, that is fine. We can choose a different location.
Nothing—neither the time, place, form, or conditions—is
preordained. I sincerely represent both the nation and the
government when I ask for the opinions of Lien Chan, chairman of the
largest political party, the KMT.
Naturally,
this same sincere invitation is extended to the leaders of all of
Taiwan's primary political parties. In fact, we have already made
similar consultative arrangements in private. I really do appreciate
the opinions offered to us so far, and hope that Chairman Lien can
feel and accept my unreserved sincerity.
Q.6
The Legislative Yuan is currently discussing whether to postpone the
approaching general interpellation session. Legislative Yuan
President Wang Jin-pyng has said that you favor postponing it. If
so, why?
A:
I exchanged views on this issue with the heads of all five Yuans
prior to my tour, and we agreed that the interval of time between
the last general interpellation, which lasted until the end of July,
and the next one, which would begin as soon as the legislators meet
in September, was probably too short. That is, if we had the general
interpellation immediately after the next administrative report in
early September, it might be too close to the previous one, which
lasted for a month and was just completed at the end of July. Was
postponement possible? The reasons for postponement had nothing to
do with Premier Tang or his health. The only consideration was the
length of the previous general interpellation and the fact that it
lasted so late into July. Was it suitable or necessary to have
another right away in September? I brought the issue up merely as an
exchange of views with President Wang of the Legislative Yuan, and
he thought the request reasonable. Whether it will be postponed,
however, will depend on inter-party negotiations and communication
between the Legislative Yuan and Executive Yuan. We will respect the
opinions of all political parties, and we do not have any
predetermined opinions. We simply raised the issue and are
discussing the facts.
Q.7
It was the position and hope of the previous administration that the
Chinese mainland and Taiwan could be unified someday under
democracy. However, you have previously mentioned that unification
is but one of several options. Does this imply that unification
might not be possible?
A:
The new administration has already clearly explained this issue. As
I said in my inaugural speech on May 20, I hope the leaders on both
sides can deal with the future question of “one China”
using their wisdom and creativity under the basic principles of
democracy and parity. I believe that the future development of both
cross-strait relations and Taiwan itself will follow this direction.
Regardless, though, the free will of the people on Taiwan must be
respected. That is to say, no country, no government, no political
party, and certainly no individual can make a decision for the 23
million people on Taiwan without their consent. In the past, US
President Bill Clinton stated quite clearly that any final
resolution to the cross-strait situation must be made with the
consent of the people on Taiwan. Similarly, the US presidential
candidates from both the Democratic and Republican Parties have
adopted the same position in their respective campaign platforms:
that the will of the people on Taiwan must be respected. I mentioned
earlier that the first article of the National Unification
Commission Establishment Guideline is to speed up the unification
process. Does this article comply with the principles of freedom and
democracy? Are the people on Taiwan choosing to unite with the
Chinese mainland out of their own free will? Is unification with the
Chinese mainland a choice being made by the 23 million people on
Taiwan under democracy? I firmly believe that democracy, freedom,
and human rights are all universal values, and thus no country,
government, political party, or individual can violate them. As a
new leader in Taiwan and as president of this country, I must seek a
consensus of the people, including everyone in the government and
the general public itself. We do not have any preconditions, nor can
there be any—thus, anything is possible. However, any decision
must conform to the choice of the 23 million people on Taiwan and
abide by the principles of freedom and democracy.
Q.8:
You mentioned earlier the difficulty of forming a domestic consensus
on cross-strait policy. Recently, Qian Qichen, the vice premier of
the Chinese mainland, gave a new interpretation of the “one-China”
principle. In the second point of this new interpretation, he says,
“both mainland China and Taiwan belong to one China.” What
is your response to this statement? What information do you think he
is trying to convey to Taiwan?
A:
It is especially important that we remind everyone to be cautious of
the different remarks made by mainland Chinese officials, as it is
virtually impossible to know for sure whose statements are true and
final and who actually represents their government’s policy.
The remarks to visiting groups from Taiwan are often omitted from
formal documents and press releases on the mainland, so how
accountable are such statements? Furthermore, we have noticed that
many international media, research institutes, and experts have
expressed a difference between what the Beijing authorities say in
their statements to domestic audiences and what they say
internationally with regard to Taiwan. Indeed, what they say to the
people on Taiwan is often contrary to what they tell the
international community. If the so-called “one China”
principle, definition, or meaning has changed, then let me ask, what
about the “one China” repeatedly mentioned in their
communiqués with over 160 nations that have formal diplomatic
relations with the Chinese mainland? The recent information we have
regarding Beijing’s orders to their foreign embassies still
refers to a so-called “one China”—the People’s
Republic of China. If today, Taiwan and the Chinese mainland are
both part of “one China,” this “one China”
refers to the People’s Republic of China, and the People’s
Republic of China is the sole, legitimate government for all of
China—if none of this has changed in their policies and
communiqués, and if we merely listen to their self-serving
statements and believe them, then aren’t we placing ourselves
in a very dangerous position? The Beijing leaders have different
statements for different groups of people. However, we will continue
to act with sincerity, creativity, and wisdom, hoping that Beijing
will eventually respond in kind. We wish to follow the spirit of
dialogue and exchange and set aside controversies, so that the two
sides can meet and talk to improve cross-strait relations, while
seeking a mutually acceptable definition of “one China.” I
wholeheartedly believe that such a definition cannot be unilaterally
decided and manipulated by any single nation, political party, or
people. We must meet and discuss it together. The outcome is true
and final only when it is acceptable to both sides. If it is just a
unilateral proposition imposed by one side on the other, then it is
not compatible with democracy, freedom, and parity. Thus, we would
like to encourage and commend the Beijing authorities to seek a
mutually acceptable meaning and definition. Thank you!
Q.9
You mentioned earlier your expectations of the new Cabinet and your
opinions on its performance. How do you feel about Vice President Lu’s
performance during your 13-day trip overseas? Also, what is your
view on her idea of relocating or renovating the Office of the
President?
A:
I would like to express both my appreciation and approval of Vice
President Lu’s performance during my absence. Indeed, not only
did Vice President Lu perform well, but everyone—Premier Tang,
all of the relevant ministries, and everyone working on the
front-line during the typhoon period—did their jobs very well.
Thus, I would like to express an equal amount of appreciation and
approval for their performance.
Regarding
the Office of the President, we believe the building is still in
fairly good condition. Thus, there is no need for renovation.
Besides, I do not think renovating the Office of President should be
a priority for the new administration. I would rather improve the
living standards of our people, government efficiency, and the
investment environment for factories and businesses, than renovate
the Office of the President.
Q.10:
You just mentioned that the future for both the people on Taiwan and
cross-strait relations should respect the will of the people on
Taiwan. By what means do you hope to understand the will of the
people? You also said that such a problem should be discussed at a
roundtable meeting attended by the leaders of all three major
political parties and a special Multiparty Task Force. However, some
political parties are not giving their support to a Multiparty Task
Force. Under such circumstances, do you think that a consensus
reached by the two mechanisms just stated can really represent the
will of the people? Or do you think that other means should be
considered, such as a plebiscite, to truly reflect the will and
desires of the people? Indeed, if the two mechanisms reach
completely different conclusions, can using a plebiscite be
completely ruled out?
A:
A public opinion poll conducted yesterday indicated that more than
80 percent of the people on Taiwan believe we should join the United
Nations. This is news that the Chinese communists do not like to
read. In fact, not only do they dislike it, but they have also
consistently boycotted and stymied any attempt made by the ROC to
participate in any international organization, including the United
Nations. This poll also revealed that between 70 and 80 percent of
the people on Taiwan prefer to maintain the status quo, regardless
of what direction cross-strait relations take in the future. The
Beijing authorities, however, want us to accept their “one-China”
principle, which would downgrade Taiwan as a part of the PRC. They
also want us to accept their so-called “one country, two
systems” formula, which would make Taiwan another Hong Kong or
Macau. All of these things obviously violate the will of the
majority of the people on Taiwan.
We are
encouraged, however, by the remarks made by both the Republican and
Democratic parties in the United States—and especially those
made by President Clinton—that any final resolution to
cross-strait issues must respect the will of the people on Taiwan.
Public opinion polls currently indicate that most of the people on
Taiwan do not wish to be a part of the Chinese mainland, and this is
a fact that neither the US government nor the US people can force us
to change. Thus, during my transit through the US, Chairman Richard
Bush welcomed us on behalf of the US government and people. At that
time, he told me that the US government expressed its utmost support
and admiration for our new government’s management of
cross-strait relations. Consequently, we do not feel that current
cross-strait relations are deteriorating, but rather, believe that
we are still in control of the situation.
What we must
do now is show our wisdom and creativity and make further
breakthroughs and improvements. However, cross-strait relations are
not a unilateral problem, but a bilateral one. On my overseas trip,
we were also very aware that the Chinese Communists were showing
restraint in their normal military exercises and at their Beidaihe
meeting. I think both of these actions convey a strong message, and
we would like to view that message from a positive perspective.
Former President Lee Teng-hui could not resolve the cross-strait
issue during his entire twelve years in office. However, if the new
government can stabilize the situation in a mere 100 days, we think
it is definitely possible to carry cross-strait normalization even
further. The most important thing is to reach a domestic consensus
on the matter. We must have absolute democracy from the bottom up.
Above all, we need to have domestic unity. I often say that the
Beijing authorities play an important role in current cross-strait
issues, but we ourselves play an even more important role. Whether
cross-strait issues can be smoothly resolved will depend on a
domestic consensus. I would like to listen to the opinions of more
people, and I sincerely hope that after the Multiparty Task Force
begins operations, that it will be easier to reach a domestic
consensus. Once again, I would like to call upon every political
party to eliminate their ideological differences and party interests
and give the interests of the nation and the people their first
priority. I am confident that such a change in thought will have a
positive impact on the future of both Taiwan and cross-strait
relations.
