Showing posts with label taiwan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taiwan. Show all posts

Saturday, October 23, 2010

So what did Ma Ying-Jeou say?

Background see e.g., "Despite his clarification and similar statements by other officials, some commentators insisted that the AP report showed Ma's intention to start political negotiations with Beijing if he wins re-election." - Focus Taiwan

The full excerpt is now published (or here). This is what Ma actually said,
  • AP: So, do I understand you correctly that, if economic issues are
    resolved during your second term, during that term, you might move on
    to political questions?
    [00:32:17]
    President Ma: As I said, it depends on how fast we move, whether these
    issues are satisfactorily resolved, and of course all the policies regarding
    the mainland are very sensitive, and we certainly will also make decisions
    on generally whether the decision receives popular support. So usually
    when we lay out our general policy, we will say that: first of all, it has to
    be something needed by the country; secondly, it has to be supported by
    the people; and thirdly, that it will be supervised by the national
    parliament to make sure that this is a policy basically meeting the needs
    of the people
    .
This is what AP reported
  • In between the poles of union and separation, Ma said his government is prepared to discuss political agreements, including security issues, as soon as the priority economic issues are dealt with. He suggested that those political talks could start as early as a second four-year term if he wins re-election in 2012.
  • "We are not intentionally delaying the talks on political issues. Certainly the economic ones are more important to people here. People also support the idea (of) economy first, politics later," said Ma. Asked if he would move to political talks in a second term once economic issues are dealt with, Ma said "it depends on how fast we move." Political issues, he said, "will come after all the major economic issues are resolved."
Regarding the territorial dispute in the South China Sea, The AP reporter Hutzler has such a loaded question
  • [45:20]
    AP: Now, since you touched on the natural resources, the U.S. has voiced
    some concerns that, you know, there’s the Diaoyutai and then there’s the
    larger issue of the free passage of shipping through the South and East
    China seas and access to natural gas deposits or whatever might be down
    there on the ocean floor. And the U.S. has voiced concerns that the
    mainland is really trying to cut off access to foreign trade in that area,
    which would have, obviously, a poor effect on Taiwan, which really owes
    its existence to free access to those shipping lanes
    . So, do you share the
    concerns of the United States?
    [45:53]
    President Ma: Certainly. I think most of the waters in the South China
    Sea should be open waters, the so-called high seas according to the Law
    of the Sea.
    And they’re open to international traffic for sure. Actually, as I
    said, countries started to occupy and garrison those islands a long time
    ago. So this is not a very new issue. We sent our troops, our Marine Corps,
    to station on those islands as early as 1956. Just 10 years ago, we changed
    that with Coast Guard instead of the Marines. I served in our Navy more
    than 30 years ago, and my unit had the responsibility to supply all these
    islands. So I understand this issue well.
    AP: So is China trying to interfere with the open water policy?
    [46:52]
    President Ma: No. So far no. And I don’t think mainland China would do
    that.
    You know, when they are becoming a power in the region, they also
    become more careful about those issues. Certainly, it wants to maintain
    its sphere of influence but I don’t believe that will reach the level of
    interfering with international traffic
    .
    16
    [47:15]
    AP: They often raise objections to the passage of U.S. military ships
    through the South China Sea and they have, at times, taken measures to
    block those ships from passing through
    . The argument that some people
    in the mainland make is that free passage does not extend to military
    vessels
    , that that can be considered to be preparing the battlefield for the
    future. Does your government believe that these types of military
    surveillance activities are normal and should be allowed?
    President Ma: Well, certainly all the activities on the oceans, particularly
    in international waters, are regulated by the United Nations Convention
    on the Law of the Sea of 1982, which came into effect in 1994. It’s very
    important to note that there are rules of conduct. For instance, a warship
    is not supposed to sail through the territorial waters of other countries, but
    if the waters are too narrow in an international strait, then they certainly
    have to do certain things to make sure that it’s an innocent passage. There
    are rules. I think that each country should follow the rules.
No, Mr Hutzler , China did not object to free passage of international ships in the seas in question, not even US gunboats. China objects to US spy ships snooping some 20 miles by its mainland and main islands only, so far. This is what China's MoFA said regarding the "spy ship harassment" incident
  • "China has lodged a solemn representation to the United States as the USNS Impeccable conducted activities in China's special economic zone in the South China Sea without China's permission," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu told a regular news briefing. 
  • "We demand that the United States put an immediate stop to related activities and take effective measures to prevent similar acts from happening," Ma said.
Passage is not, and has never been, China's complaint. Especially, if it is passing in the open sea far away from its naval bases.China complained about the "activities", not the "passage".

Mr Hutzler, you need to do your homework before an interview, and you need to go back to school to study how to write a report.

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

The 1783/1785 Ryukyu Map by Japanese cartographer Hayashi

Nicolas Kristof's blog regarding Diaoyu (Pinnacles Islands aka Senkaku as translated by Japanese) has attracted a letter from the Japanese government. He maintained his view, but also published the letter from Japan to provide the other side of the argument.

This (三国通覧図説 / 林子平 図並説)should be the 1783 map mentioned in Kristof's blog. It was  mentioned byJapanese version and the source of the map below)Japanese scholar by Kiyoshi Inoue , Professor of History department, Kyoto University
  • Ryukyu territroy began from the Kume Island and the area east of it, whereas Chihwei Yu and the Huangwei Yu and Tiaoyu Yu (Diaoyutai) to the west were Chinese territory. Obviously, this was defined in clear terms after the middle of the 16th century at the latest. There are no records or documents whatsoever by the Ryukyu side or the Japanese expressing disagreement or doubt. Moreover, there are not even legends, not to say documents about contacts of the Ryukyu people with the Tiaoyu Island (Diaoyutai) and Huangwei Yu in ancient times. Sailing from Ryukyu to the Tiaoyu Island (Diaoyutai) was particularly difficult because it was against the wind and the tide. In the middle of the 19th century, that is, the closing years of Japan's feudal period, the Ryukyu people knew the Tiaoyu Island (Diaoyutai) as Yokon (or Yokun), the Huangwei Yu as "Kubashima", and the Chihwei Yu as "Kumesekishima". This was confirmed by the records of the last Chinese imperial envoy. These in no way affect the title to these territories. The map and explanations about Ryukyu Kingdom in the book General Illustrations of Three Countries by Shihei Hayashi were completely based on the Chungshan Mission Records. The Chungshan Mission Records had found their way to Japan long ago and there was even a Japanese edition. This document was the most comprehensive and authoritative source of knowledge about Ryukyu for the Japanese people in the late Edo period.
The map labeled the islands in the same color as China's (Qing Empire), most likely because of the recording of shipping route China used to reach Ryukyu.(source: Hokkaido University)

Full Map and Japan Map (日本図 + 三國圖)
三國=琉球、蝦夷、朝鮮,當時皆不屬日本。當時還特別有列明為無主島的,是今天的小笠原群島。(The 3 Country maps means Japan and its 3 neighbors, Ryukyu, Korea and Hokkaido, not part of Japan back then. It also included a section of "uninhabited/un-owned island groups", which are today's Ogasawara Islands)

Ryukyu Map (琉球島図)

Diaoyu and Taiwan portion enlarged (Diaoyu colored same as Qing's, instead of classified as "uninhabited" like Ogasawara. As Professor Inoue indicated, the map is probably created based on his reading of the Chinese travelogue)


Japan was first interested in Ryukyu in 1885 but waited till January of 1895 to formally set claim on the islands, by then the Japanese army had already completely smashed Qing' navy and army, and have taken Lushunkou near today's Dalian in November 1894. The Shimonoseki Treaty was signed in April but the war was almost finished by January. Some used the difference in dates (January vs April) to claim that the Diaoyu was not part of the spoil of the war, but the fact is the Pescadores Islands (Penghu) was taken by the Japanese in March 1895, also before the signing of the Treaty.

However, I am not as confident as Kristof about how ICJ would decide, for reasons outlined by Alexander Peterson.

===
The first (full) map above, to the east (actually, between E and ESE) of Ulrungdo (鬱林島), seems to be an island marked as Korean held (朝鮮ノ持ニ), seem to fit the relative position of Dokdo (Takeshima) very nicely, and was labelled Takeshima in the enlarged map below.

Enlarged portion shows Takeshima held by Chosen


Below is the Korea map from Hayashi's book, where Ulengdo (鬱林島)is shown as the island very close to the Korean mainland.

Korea Map (朝鮮八道図)


Hokkaido Map (蝦夷国全図)





Sunday, September 13, 2009

China Lake



I suppose the "World" Achipelagoes in Dubai is well known by now. Do you know there is also a "China Lake"? (Source and details/history in comment #9, btw, this is a great map blog, by a pro-green blogger in Taiwan)

The exact location is here.

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Chen Shui Bian's contribution to TWII

Source: finance.yahoo.com

May 20th 2000 to March 20th 2008, underpeform Korea by 120%
On May 20th 2000, when Chen Shui Bian took over, TWII was 9120, Korea KOS 731, Hong Kong HSI 14478, Dow Jones 10627.

On Mar 19th, 2008, before the election, TWII was 8179, KOS 1622, HSI 21867, DJI 12100.

TWI underperformed all the benchmark markets, and fell by 10.3% while the closest benchmark(with similar industry mix, stage of economic development and market) KOS rose by 122%.

This is the price the people of Taiwan paid for the pursuit of ideology. (note also that the lag started to widen significantly in his second term -- sort of echoing my hypothesis in my previous post regarding long term accountability)

---

p.s. Some may argue that TWII also underperformed under the pragmatic Ma Ying-jeou. But it was not nearly as worse/significantly, albeit there had only been a few months and we need more data to test. TWII underperformed the benchmarks by 10-15% in the past 6 months

Mar 19 to Oct 9, 2008

---
Not really related: on a separate topic of the infamous  Arms Procurement Deal, US Presidential Candidate McCain has offered his candid insight
  • “These sales ... would help retain America’s edge in the production of advanced weaponry and represent a positive sign in these difficult economic times,”
It is just about the money. So no need to get too upset, Mr Hu, nor get too excited, those on the island.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Georgia - Taiwan

Cominganarchy draws the Georgia lesson to Taiwan

  • ...But that only works as long as no one calls a bluff. In 1996, after China launched so-called “test” missiles toward Taiwan to intimidate the country and influence the election, President Clinton sent two aircraft carriers to the area. The appearance of resolve by the US to defend a small democratic nation appeared solid. Would the same support materialize today? As deterence, probably. But what about after an invasion had begun? The experience in Russia suggests otherwise

Fortunately Mr Shui-bian Saakashvili Chen lost the election, and fortunately the more pragmatic (though no less corrupt nor more competent historically -- hope Dr. Ma will cure that) KMT were in control of the Legislative Yuan, otherwise we could have been hearing a lot more gun fire around the Taiwan Strait than in the Caucasus.

As Cominganarchy pointed out, "plenty of analysts" connects the Georgia lesson with Taiwan, i.e. regarding the reaction of the mighty America.

plus Thomas Barnett :

  • For now, the Bush-McCain-Obama calls for cease-fire seem the logical course, but I see no easy fixes. These little breakaway bits (along with others) are sort of Russia's post-Soviet "Taiwan"--something it likes to get all jacked about but essentially harmless to the wider security world (in the sense that no one is really going to go to the mattresses over Abkhazia or South Ossetia). China's got its route on Taiwan (full of indirectness) and Russia's got its centuries-old approach.

I wonder what Mr Kaplan has to say, not that it matters though, just curious.

Monday, July 21, 2008

The ROC Airforce Marshal speaks out on (against) the infamous arms procurement

Usually, one can only speak one's own mind when there is no other constraint or conflict of interests, e.g. serving in the governemnt. The Taiwan (ROC) Airforce Marshal Lee Kui-yong did exactly that when he retired from his position.

The government's view (whether DPP or KMT) has always been supportive of the "arms procurement", despite the obvious logical flaw and the over-price of the deal, for pleasing a strategic ally (or in Lee Teng-hui word, paying for protection fee).

Marshal Lee's view is in line of what I disucussed years ago.

  • submarines are useless in Taiwan Strait
  • PAC is not practical because there are too many missiles that the mainland can produced much cheaply

He added that even the F-16 is too costly and makes not much sense (which I would also agree). He suggests developing (electronic) interfering technology, which does make a lot of sense.

I have to believe that marshal Lee must have told Chen Shui-bian about. I can even be convinced that Mr Chen Shui-bian agreed with him and his secret plan (which I postulated before and now seems supported) is to leave this dirty mess to MYJ.

On strategy, he tactfully disagreed with the "proactive defense" doctrine, by saying that it might apply for powers such as the US, but for Taiwan, perhaps the best way to defend is just simply defense (i.e., not attack) -- something quite straighforward, but often got muddled by some wisers.

Of course, this draws categorical denial/disagreement from the KMT government in public, and maybe on in public.

---


前空軍作戰司令反對軍購 國防部:個人發言

* 2008-07-21
* 今日晚報
* 【中時電子報戴志揚/台北報導】

才剛退役的前空軍作戰司令李貴榮日前向國防部長陳肇敏上了一份「國防興革」萬言書,直言台灣不應該向美購買F-16戰機,萬言書中甚至對於國軍積極建構的「博勝案」、購買「愛國者飛彈及潛艦」等都闡明反對立場。國防部軍事發言人池玉蘭今(二十一日)天表示,國防部部對於各方關切建軍備戰的意見與期許,均表示尊重與感謝。相關建言若符合本部政策者,將予採納,若與現階段政策不符者,將列入參考。池玉蘭強調,李貴榮的發言純屬他自己個人意見,並不代表國防部立場。

對於高達千億元台幣的F-16採購案,李貴榮表示應該用於機場修復功能與基礎建設,而不是在「戰力保存」的戰略架構下,在台灣有限的飛行員與訓練空域下採購大量戰機,造成訓練及維護花費成本過高,排擠其餘軍種武器採購。

對於國軍以大筆預算建構多年,聯合三軍作戰指揮管制通訊的「博勝案」,李建榮也直言,這是美軍以自身經驗,在「攻勢作戰」下的產物。台灣目前都是採取「守勢作戰」,因此套用美軍的思維模式並不適用。

李貴榮也表示,愛國者飛彈只要性能提升就可達到目的,因為即使購買再多數目的愛國者飛彈,還是比不上中共導彈的增加數目。另外台灣海峽根本不適宜潛艦作戰,如果購買後無法發揮其最大效用,根本毫無意義。應該將經費用於研發飛彈干擾技術以及各型反制飛彈,這才是實際的作為。

針對李貴榮對於軍購案上的萬言書,國防部強調,目前對於軍購案,美方至今尚未通知對我暫停重大軍購案。我國對美國軍購的政策目前並無任何改變,更不會因為兩岸關係和緩而改變自我防衛之堅定決心,只要依法完成建案程序,並經立法院完成審議之各項軍購案及執行中之軍購個案,國防部還是持續積極推動。

國防部強調,目前政府已透過各種管道,強烈表達軍購意願,並促請美方儘早對我供售防衛性武器。

Friday, June 13, 2008

Echoes: 2 pieces of news on Taiwan (and how much was wasted by the HKG ATC detour)



Some old posts were echoed today.

1) I blogged a couple years ago about the problem of Japan in the gas field in East China Sea. i.e. it is very costly and impractical to build pipe over the 3000m deep Okinawa trench separting the field and Okinawa.

There is a new analysis over the internet by a Taiwanese analyst recently


  • 我们从这张图可以清楚看到在东海的争议区除了钓鱼岛没有其他岛屿,所以归属权完全决定於海底的结构。图中显示整个东海大陆架完全是中国大陆的海底延伸一直到琉球海沟,平均深度 370公尺。钓鱼岛非常清楚是在东海的大陆架上。
    琉球群岛西边深蓝色的海域就是着名的琉球海沟,深度2940公尺。

    我们看到整个东海大陆架非常整齐地被琉球海沟切断。所以东海大陆架是非常完整而连贯的从大陆海岸线延伸到琉球海沟,按照国际海洋法的规定,这整片大陆架完全归属中国。

  • 日本根本不可能独自开发东海的天然气
    图1的右上角是一个大范围的海底地形图,不但包括东海也包括黄海、渤海、还有日本海。从这个地形图读者很清楚看到琉球海沟是从台湾的东北角开始一直伸延到日本九州岛的西北角。也就是说琉球海沟彻底把日本的从东海大陆架分隔出去。
    天然气不比石油。海上油井可以附设储油槽,然後由油轮运到世界各处。天然气则不然。海上气井开发後必须建立输送管到用户。
    「春晓气田」距离浙江宁波大约 350公里,输气管长 450公里,输送途径是浅海,虽然成本高一点但没有任何技术问题。
    但是对日本而言,任何东海大陆架的天然气田即使能够开发出来也无法运到日本,因为输气管不但长达千里,而且输送途径中间有琉球海沟无法跨越。日本唯一的办法就是建一个海上天然气的液化工厂,然後用船将液化天然气运走。但是在大海上建立天然气液化工厂以目前的技术根本不可能。
    东海的天然气日本即使看得到也吃不到。
    所以不论是从国际法的角度,还是从技术开发的角度,日本要在东海天然气田上分一杯羹都是痴心妄想。

    海上开采油气的费用非常高昂,勘探、测量、钻井、 设管线不但样样都是钱,而且具有高风险。举个例子,在三百五十公尺深的海域钻井,每一个勘探井的花费是三千万美元,能不能出油或出气还不知道。中国在东海大陆架作出巨大的投资与艰苦的工作,日本只在旁边看。
    日本原来的计算是认为中国东海的天然气田要在2010年以後才会投产,所以打算等待中国什麽都开发完成以後再来争。日本要捡现成的便宜,而不要担一分的风险。但是日本没有想到中国的开发速度很快,在2005年便建成投产,於是眼睛立刻就红了,抢着提出要求分一杯羹。
    其实中国完全不必理会日本的无理要求,因为日本根本不具有开发东海油气田的条件与技术。日本想用叁股的方法来分一杯羹实在是可气又可笑。日本的要求属於“见者有份”的强盗行为。


I wouldn't use such emotion words as that analyst. But that is pretty much the logic of why Japan's negotiation chips are not much.


2) I also blogged about how wasteful it is to detour the flights from mainland cities to those in Taiwan.

A few pro-DPP commentators tried to shift the blame to mainland regarding this issue of 'straightening the path 去弯取直'. Today finally it is widely reported in the media. I hope these political nonsense be gone in a few months.

  • 台 構 思 兩 岸 設 專 用 航 線
    昨日 兩 岸 兩 會 提 出 直 航 航 線 為 「 截 彎 取 直 」 , 不 必 再 繞 經 港 澳 或 韓 國 航 區 , 改 為 直 接飛 越 台 海 。 但 此 建 議 在 台 灣 引 起 反 對 , 故 下 月 4 日 的 包 機 仍 會 是 採 用 節 日 包 機 , 繞經 港 澳 的 航 線 飛 行 。 而 台 灣 民 航 局 正 計 劃 開 闢 新 的 航 線 以 「 截 彎 取 直 」 , 其中 一 個 構 思 是 兩 岸 在 南 北 各 畫 設 一 條 專 用 航 線 供 周 末 包 機 飛 航 , 該 航 線 不 會 直 接 跨越 台 海 中 線 , 可 避 免 軍 方 反 對 , 比 起 現 時 節 日 包 機 須 繞 經 港 澳 航 區 , 此 航 線 在 飛 航時 間 及 營 運 成 本 上 , 都 有 很 大 的 節 省 空 間 。 但 因 未 獲 台 軍 方 同 意 , 以 及 還 未 與 大 陸方 面 協 商 , 有 關 計 劃 仍 在 研 究 當 中 。 台 灣 《 蘋 果 日 報 》
    台 軍 方 反 對 飛 越 台 海
    周末 包 機 直 航 是 此 次 兩 會 協 商 主 要 議 題 之 一 。 台 灣 軍 方 前 晚 重 申 , 同 意 包 機 分 別 沿 南北 國 際 航 線 進 入 台 北 飛 航 情 報 區 , 但 反 對 直 接 穿 越 台 海 的 立 場 沒 有 改 變 。 所 謂 「 截彎 取 直 」 , 即 兩 岸 點 對 點 直 飛 , 取 代 現 繞 經 香 港 或 日 本 海 域 的 航 線 , 台 軍 方 擔 心 直飛 後 一 旦 兩 岸 起 戰 事 , 對 大 陸 戰 機 犯 台 無 法 有 足 夠 時 間 預 警 。
    「 拿 西 裝 換 人 家 內 褲 」
    台民 航 局 副 局 長 林 信 得 昨 日 表 示 , 直 航 構 想 「 仍 在 做 功 課 」 , 需 要 與 國 防 部 商 討 取 得共 識 , 由 陸 委 會 拍 板 。 民 進 黨 昨 日 則 狂 批 , 江 丙 坤 等 都 是 與 中 國 有 龐 大 利 益 關 係 者, 提 出 「 截 彎 取 直 」 是 「 拿 西 裝 換 人 家 內 褲 」 。

DPP politicians invented a funny analogy for trading direct flight for its rather ill-defined 'security issue': "Suits for underwear".

Since the DPP claim to be a pro-environmental "Green" party. We shall examine how green this trade-off amounts to (ignoring the costs of the time wasted by businessmen/travellers for the time being)

Now. Let's estimate the amount of gasoline wasted on this DPP's new suit. For the planned 18 flights per day (there are over 30 flights between HK and Taiwan each day, of which more than half are transits into the mainland), this would mean (excluding ex-Guangzhou's 3 flights/day) 15x700x2=21000miles of trips waster. i.e. 105,000 gallons per day (5 gallon per mile), or 37,000,000 gallon per year. At US$4/gallon (this week) it is $138m/year.

Go figure how green DPP is, and how much gas has been wasted in the past 8(+) years.

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Competitive disadvantage

When you have certain distraction which drains a significant portion of your resources, you have a major competitive disadvantage. This is China's competitive disadvanage (fortunately it could be largely reduced, if not resolved during the next 4 years, i.e. provided that the PRC government is not making stupid mistakes it did in the previous 3 decades) -- hat tip, cominganarchy.com
  • Here’s an interesting review by Ken Kamoche on African-Asian relations, and the problem of aid. The goals of the three big Asian nations can essentially be summed up as follows:
  • CHINA Goal: Resources; Containing Taiwan
  • China has hosted the world leaders of just about all African party nations, primarily because of China’s thirst for resources continues unabated, but also because to contain the political recognition of Taiwan. Although both China and many African countries have come away with benefits, they have been skewed in favour of China, and the relationship has been dogged by controversy.
  • INDIA Goal: Business Ties; Political support
  • Dehli has long eyed Africa’s for business opportunities, but the approach is ad hoc and piecemeal, and often all rhetoric with little substance, except in terms of exporting labour to Africa. Part of this is hindered by the fact that in many ways, India remains a developing region like Africa (so is China, but in a different way). Then there is UNSC membersip, an exclusive tier of nations that India dreams to join to solidify its status as a world power. The political equation of gaining a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, or in the case of Taiwan, simply being allowed to join the UN, requires block support, which is where Africa comes in.
  • JAPAN Goal: Political Support; New Markets
  • Japan has the vaguest goals in Africa. Like India, Japan wants a seat on the UNSC. It also wants support on international treaties regarding everything from global warming to whaling. But Japan may hold the greatest hope for Africa if it can help growth in the same way it helped Thailand, where the largest Japanese manufacturers, anxious to escape the high costs of labour and production in Japan, built not just roads and dams, but also industrial parks. One interesting fact not noted in the article is that Africa is increasingly becoming a market for Japanese goods, such as the growth in exports of automobiles from Japan to Africa, while exports to other markets have stagnated or dropped.

Sunday, March 30, 2008

Postmortem of Taiwan election

Just as I had thought, according to Ma's aide Su Junbin (English translated by ESWN)
  • The extremist/fundamentalist (i.e deep greeen and deep blue) had already made up their mind. It was the moderates who were swayed. Actually, not just be swayed into voting, but also into NOT voting
  • 苏俊宾:我们的支持率其实没有上升,因为讨厌庄国荣的人本来就支持我们,他讲了更令人讨厌的话,对我们来讲没有任何帮助。
    南都:也就是说,庄国荣事件没有对选举造成任何影响。
    苏俊宾:有。我们的支持率没有上升,但他们(长昌配)的支持率掉了两个百分点,连绿营的基本盘都有2%看不过去。长昌配的支持率都已经很低了,再掉两个百分点是雪上加霜。所以,庄国荣事件对我们来讲,最大的效果并不是攻城略地,而是守住城池,使他们没办法步步进攻。所以庄国荣有一定的贡献,应该颁“华夏奖章”给他。
  • Q. Six days before the election, Ministry of Education Secretary-General Chuang Kuo-jung used foul language at a Hsieh-Su rally. Even the normally intransigent Hsieh-Su campaign headquarters issued an apology. The media believed that this incident affected the Hsieh-Su campaign. After the election, certain pan-green voters thought that Chung Kuo-jung and Chen Shui-bian were the culprits for the election loss. According to the KMT internal polls, how many percentage points did Ma-Siew get as a result of Chung Kuo-jung?
  • A. Our support level did not rise, because all those who detest Chuang Kuo-jung are our supporters already. Even if he said something worse, it would not have helped us.
  • Q. That is to say, the Chuang Kuo-jung affair had no impact?
  • A. There was an impact. While our support level did not rise, the Hsieh-Su support level fell by 2% because even the greens found it intolerable. The Hsieh-Su support level was low to begin with, and this made it even lower. The Chuang Kuo-jung enabled us to defend our territory and ensure that they cannot attack us. Therefore, Chuang Kuo-jung made a contribution.
  • It was the economy, stupid. And it was the China market that matters the economy, stupid!
  • “民进党过去八年来的两岸政策是封锁的,它没有办法解决中层的问题,导致台湾没有办法跟韩国、日本、新加坡去竞争,它们跟大陆的经贸是正常的,我们则是有重重限制的。在这样的前提下,我们当然想改变。所以我们的一个议题抵得上他们20个议题,最后从选票也可以反映出来。”
  • DPP was caught with surprise and become inconsistent at Ma's reaction to Tibet. When you got inconsistent and put aside your values and your principles at an all out offense, you lose (take heed, pan-Dem in HK!)
  • 过去民进党政府抵制奥运圣火到台,民视、三立电视台等亲绿的媒体都拍手鼓励。TVBS跟其他的媒体则讲:政治归政治,体育归体育。但是这次马英九发表声明之后,三立电视台就错乱了,他们开始讲“政治归政治,体育归体育”了
  • 所以那天很有意思的,过去民进党政府抵制奥运圣火到台,民视、三立电视台等亲绿的媒体都拍手鼓励。TVBS跟其他的媒体则讲:政治归政治,体育归体育。但是这次马英九发表声明之后,三立电视台就错乱了,他们开始讲“政治归政治,体育归体育”了。当你听到民进党和亲绿的媒体也在讲“体育跟政治分离”的时候,你就知道他们无法操弄“统独”意识了。我们把它逼到理性那里,有什么不好?我们把它逼回正轨,它就无法操纵了。选举最怕什么?最怕情感。投票是个感情的动作,是个情绪的动作。而现在,它要挑战我们,它必须理性。在这种情况之下,很简单就达到了我们想要的效果。

Good lesson for HK. Particularly the last point.

Monday, March 24, 2008

Light reading: how KMT lost the previous election




Q: How did KMT lose the previous election in 2004?



A: Because some of its supporters used their personal seals to chop vote!

The "Greatest Beaty" in the "Greater China" is not alone, an influential writer (MYJ had to answer her question about setting example for 6 year old in his winning speech on Saturday) implied she did the same, and probably four years ago as well. Our Greatest Beauty also told the press that a few of her friends also made the same mistake. Plus another actress Chang Ting, and some others, all pan-blue voters.

(UDN alleged our GB probably did the right thing 4 years ago, but he personal seal might have been a round one then -- she said she carries 3 seals with her)

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Taiwan election: the game is over, Ma wins

票數拉大到80萬 雙邊總部兩樣情 藍HIGH 綠低迷
  • 2008年 03月 22日 17:39 ╱ 壹蘋果網絡
    根據中選會最新統計,馬蕭配得票數為2,851,495,長昌配的2,052,158,馬蕭領先長昌近80萬票,由於票數差距逐漸拉大,雙方競選總部也呈現兩樣情,長昌氣勢低迷,馬蕭則HIGH到不行,支持民眾頻頻歡呼,馬蕭也決定提前於7點召開記者會。

As of this moment, the announce vote is 2,851,495 vs 2,052,158 , with Ma Ying Jeou in the lead (as predicted). Unlike 4 years ago, this is the data from the Central Election Committee, not some pro-Blue media. The game is already over for Hsieh. The Blue can celebrate. So will Taiwan's economy and peace across the strait for the next 4 years.

Viva democracy! Taiwan has set a model to the the rest of Asia that democratic transition from a dictatorship is possible, such that even after ceding power to the opposition for a total length of 8 years, the incumbent could regain power -- as long as it is able to win back the people.

p.s. Too busy for blogging recently, but I have been updating the reading list on the top of the right column.

p.s.2. The NYT prophet Keith Bradsher wrote, "The suppression of Tibet protests by Chinese security forces, as well as missteps by the Nationalist Party, which Beijing favors, have nearly erased what had seemed like an insuperable lead for Ma Ying-jeou, the Harvard-educated lawyer who has been the front-runner in the race." -- this has to be the most hilarious prediction of the year. :) Note that he did not bother to clarify what he referred to as 'missteps', and how he measured 'nearly erased'. But this is how our supposed unbiased and free media try to sway our opinion.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Taiwan's friend down to 23



Taiwan's number of friends dropped to 23. As predicted, the average GDP/cap and size (both area and population) of the group continue to fall (Malawi being the second in my list of prediction, i.e. second largest. Bukina Faso next?).



One interesting tidbit of Malawi, is Lake Malawi, with its unusual demarcation and the biodiversity. Malawi owns over 70% of the lake surface. The lake also boasts the highest number of fish species among all lakes in the world.

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Taiwan discretization - 1.4:1 not (3:1)


The voting result in Taiwan is KMT 53.5%:DPP 38.17%.

This is approximately 1.4:1 or 7:5. A mighty accomplishment for KMT. But it is not as absolute as the magic numbers 81:27 (i.e. 3:1) in terms of seats.

DPP only has itself to blame for such a strategic mistake, and incompetence in governing. Chen stepped down not because he has failed the voters with the corruption and governing fiasco, but because he has agreed to the rule of game that would magnify 7:5 into 3:1. As to how this magnification works, I will refer you to twofish, a great blog unfortunately also blocked by our GFW nanny.

Tuesday, January 1, 2008

ROC Territorial claims



This is the territorial claim by ROC (the Republic of China government) via wiki, which is the basis of the territorial claim (and disputes) for PRC until recently, when most disputes were settled.

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Going into the GFW

Will stay for a while inside the GFW.

Probably much less blogging here, please also check the msn blog which I had sort of abandoned since this year. I will proably post there if I find the GFW too time comsuming to tackle.

Meanwhile, enjoy this cross-strait link via ESWN, perhaps a much better gauge of what the people inside the GFW think about the other side of the strait, which is quite different from what you read from the Angry-youth over the internet.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

The problem of Ma Ying jeou

闾丘露薇一語中的
  • 至于陈水扁,他批评马英九,当年在美国读书的时候,编辑“波士顿通讯”,批评美丽岛事件的当事者,还批评解严,站在了历史错误的一边,而他和谢长廷当年站在了历史正确的一边。但是问题是,当年站在历史正确一边,并不意味着之后就不会犯错,而曾经站在错误一边,并不意味着现在所站的地方是正确的。只可惜马英九缺乏反省的精神,其实承认自己过去的错误,并不会因此付出代价,不敢面对历史的领导者,才会更让台湾民众担忧,这样的领导人会带领台湾怎样走向未来

Even though DPP look wrecked these day, I am veyr skeptical of Ma Ying-jeou's ability to win the election in 2008. The reason couldn't be better put by what Luqiuluwei said in her blog.

  • Chen Shui Bian accused Ma was on the wrong side with history while he studied at Boston, when Ma was the editor for a (Chinese) journal called Boston Communication. The journal accused those involved with the Formosa incident, and criticized the lifting of martial law. While Chen himself was on the "right side" with history.
  • But the problem is, making a mistake in the past does not neccessarily mean one is wrong today. On the contrary, making it right is the past does neccessarily mean one is right today. The shame for Ma is he does not have the courage to reflect. As a matter of fact, admitting a mistake in the past, does not neccessarily mean that one has to pay for it now. The political leaders who cannot face his own history will be cause of concern for the people in Taiwan. How can a leader as such lead Taiwan to the future?

Well, Ma has a lot of baggages to disown. Not just those of himself. His own mistake can be explained, but the consequence is that he would have opened a whole can of "worms", i.e., there are a lot more he needs to explain and that might put off the old guards in KMT.

Ma is carrying the baggages of Soong, Lien, KMT, and even that of Chiang Kai-shek. He needs to disown them one by one. He should not have the illusion that defending the wrongs of the old Chiang dynasty will help with his political career or increase a single vote for him, or distanting or even disowning the traditional KMT values will cost him a single vote. Precisely the opposite, the old guards in KMT ("deeo Blue") have no better choice than voting for him, even if he is courageous enough to criticize Chiang.

Unless Ma does that, DPP may win the next election again in 2008. Because DPP is right, that the alternative is not to be trusted. Moving to the middle (between Blue and Green) is the right strategy. But that is not enough.

Ma Ying-jeou needs to listen to Luqiu, and do the right thing. Let the old guards go to PFP, they will not vote for DPP because you denounce the wrong's of the Chiang dynasty.

Sunday, June 17, 2007

Superboys in Taiwan -- Super Avenue of Stars

Sorry, too busy to blog. But I would recommend this post by Sidekick.
溏心風暴的星光大道 (ESWN translation in English)
Related: How Pfizer's Viagra sales skyrocketed in HK

Supergirl finally got a sequel. It is called "Super Avenue of Stars", a similar singing contest in Taiwan, produced by Huang Zongwei, the producer of the celebrated Mengguo.

The key element that deviates from Supergirl is that in SAS there is a challenger session, where the challenger can pick one of the finalists and replace him. The germ in SAS is that there is a really good challenger, who is arguably as good as or even better than the best incumbent. He chose to fight the toughest battle, by choosing to challenge the incumbent leader and sing the song the incumbent has sang, winning 2 round before lost in a controversial final round of challenge, and -- you got it right, CRIED! That was a touching scene. The common theme for the Supergirls and Superboys is that they all like to cry.

Because of this show, an old song became a new hit in Taiwan.






The preliminary round of challenge


---
Mengguo is quick to spoof






There is more in Taiwan than corrupted politicians, political bickering, or dumb money diplomacy. It is still a beautiful island.

Thursday, June 7, 2007

Taiwan's friends - updated

I blogged about the collection of micro-pals Taiwan had a couple years ago.
I also made some prediction, which basically stated that the size (GDP/pop) of these states will fall while the total number may not, as the larger the economy of the states are, the larger the incentive to take the mainland over Taiwan (less easy to be bought).

I was in general right. As Chad and now Costa Rica switched sides, while a tiny St Lucia came on board. Going forward, I maintain that same trend will continue, i.e. the next to go is likely to be one of Burkina Faso, Malawi, Guatemala, Dominican Republic or Paraguay. While a nano-state might come aboard between now and the 2008 Olympic.



I am sure the diplomats in both sides of the Strait understand this. But there is not much they could do to change such trend. (i.e., either for PRC to keep a nano-state or ROC to keep a larger one)

p.s. editgrid tool via erica.

Monday, March 19, 2007

China's dream for brand

Yes, brand means high margin, obscene profit, easy money. China wants it. It wants to create international brand. It supports its enterprises to expand overseas.

We have seen Lenovo, Haier, CNOOC, TCL, all expanding overseas, dreaming of building a global brand, with mixed success.

This is not to say one should not try. Many European and American enterprises have suffered the TCL style fisaco. The problem with China is, as Premier Wen pointed out in his recent essay, do the other ("non-brand") Chinese companies receive fair treatment from the goverment and the Chinese banks? Are these deals fair to the banks and the shareholders of the bank?

What the Chinese bureaucrats need to know is, perhaps, what does brand really mean?

Terry Guo of Hon Hai precision, famous for the iPOD manyfacturing and the Foxconn "scandal" and success (the share price increased more than 4 folds in less than a year after IPO), has this to say (source: Fong Cheuk Yu)
  • 「 沒 錯 , 我 們 沒 有 品 牌 , 但 製 造就 是 我 們 的 品 牌 。 我 們 不 是 大 眾 的 品 牌 , 但 我 們 是 供 應 商 的 品 牌 。 其 實 我 認 為 品 牌很 難 做 , 尤 其 是 中 國 大 陸 , 誰 還 記 得 那 麼 多 牌 子 ? 」
  • Right, we do not produce a brand, but manufacturing is our brand. We are not a consumer brand, but we are a brand among the OEM/ODM...

Hon Hai is indeed a brand owners' brand. McDonald is a consumer brand, as all the consumers know that what McDonald means and know its quality. Hon Hai enjoys exactly that among all the brand owners, Apple, Motorola, Xbox, HP, Dell, etc.

So are TSMC, Wanxiang, Johnson Electric, and many factories in the Pearl and Yangtze delta.

A brand does not have to be recognized by an average consumer, it just has to be recognized by its customers.