The Anwar Ibrahim of Taiwan

The Anwar Ibrahim of Taiwan
The Framing of Fung Hu-hsiang
Bevin Chu
July 25, 2005


Fung Hu-hsiang, the Anwar Ibrahim of Taiwan, and his daughter, Fung Fu-hua

Question: If a government wishes to maintain a “democratic and progressive” face to the outside world, but also wishes to silence a troublesome, high-profile critic, what should it do?

Answer: It should frame him for a sex crime, of course.

Convicting a hated political enemy of a political crime elevates him to the status of a martyr. It transforms him into a hero, even a legend, among his peers. It attracts additional supporters to his cause. Demands for his release become a rallying cry for the political opposition.

Successfully framing one’s political enemy of a sex crime, on the other hand, reduces him to the level of a pervert. It transforms him to a social pariah, even among his staunchest political allies. It deprives him of political and even moral support, leaving him isolated and unable to strike back.

Society considers sex crimes especially repugnant. This makes a sex crime the ideal crime with which to frame a political enemy, while avoiding the appearance of persecuting him for political motives.

Are ruling regimes aware of this difference in public reaction? You bet they are.

Have ruling regimes taken advantage of this difference in public reaction? You bet they have.

The ruling regime in Malaysia took advantage of the public’s repugnance with sex crimes five years ago, when it persecuted former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, the most prominent critic of the Mahathir Mohamad regime. Anwar was convicted of sodomizing his male chauffeur and sentenced to nine years in prison. In 2004, a post-Mahathir court reversed the conviction and restored Anwar’s innocence.

The ruling regime on Taiwan is taking advantage of the public’s repugnance with sex crimes today, persecuting former vice-presidential candidate/legislator Elmer Fung Hu-hsiang, the most prominent critic of the Chen Shui-bian regime and the Lee Teng-hui regime that preceded it. Fung was convicted of raping his family’s Filipino maid and sentenced to four years in prison.

Fung of course never raped anyone. The crime Fung was convicted of never happened. The only person raped during this mockery of justice was the accused, Fung Hu-hsiang. He was raped by Chen Shui-bian’s kangaroo court. The illegal and illegitimate Chen Shui-bian regime framed him for a sex crime in order to exact revenge upon its most hated political enemy.

Many people have forgotten that Chen Shui-bian once served an eight month prison term for libel. Chen, you can be certain, never forgot. The man Chen libeled, the man who filed a successful libel suit against him, the man responsible for Chen doing time, was Fung Hu-hsiang. No one else has ever made Chen pay such a high price for his irresponsible behavior. Chen, as those close to him know, is not one to leave such a score unsettled.

The fact is that Fung Hu-hsiang’s “rape” case should never have gone to trial, let alone concluded with a guilty verdict. The prosecution’s case against Fung was a joke. Any judge in any one of the 50 states of the union would have immediately thrown it out of court for insufficient evidence, and sternly reprimanded the prosecution for wasting the court’s valuable time. Taiwan alas, is not a state of the union, as much as some Taiwan independence zealots might wish it were.

Rose, the Filipina maid who originally accused Fung of raping her, later recanted her testimony, in toto. Wracked with guilt for having victimized an innocent man, she confessed that acquaintances goaded her into pointing the finger at Fung. She made this confession with legal counsel at her side. Her confession was witnessed by Philippine government officials and the Republic of China’s official representative to the Philippines.

Chen Shui-bian’s “Star Chamber” responded to this astonishing and unwelcome development by refusing to even acknowledge her recantation. It refused even to look into the matter. Instead, it dismissed her recantation out of hand as “hearsay evidence without legal force.” After all, it already had the verdict Chen wanted. The last thing it wanted was to sift through a lot of inconvenient facts.

Often the most serious obstacle standing in the way of understanding a foreign country is not what one doesn’t know, but “what one knows that just ain’t so.” This is especially true of Taiwan. Many westerners genuinely believe that Taiwan is a democracy. Sad to say, that just ain’t so.

By 1996, Taiwan had become an “elective dictatorship.” By 2004, after Chen Shui-bian stole the election, Taiwan became a “non-elective dictatorship.” Taiwan today is a system under the Rule of Men, not the Rule of Law. More precisely, Taiwan today is a system under the Rule of One Man, Chen Shui-bian. Taiwan’s judiciary is not an independent branch of government, but the obedient tool of an Imperial Executive. The outrageous verdicts of Taiwan’s courts in response to the 319 Election Lawsuits have borne that out. So has the outrageous verdict of Taiwan’s court in the Fung Hu-hsiang “rape” case.

The internal affairs of sovereign and independent foreign nations are normally not the concern of the US government. The Chen Shui-bian regime however, is an exception. The Chen regime, like the regime of the Shah of Iran, is a client of the United States. Republic of China citizens on Taiwan voted the Chen regime out of office in 2004 by a 53 to 47% margin. The Chen regime remains in office only because the Bush II administration rubber-stamped Chen’s “re-election” and strong-armed the actual winners Lien Chan and James Soong into accepting the Chen regime’s illegal power grab. As such, the United States government, the “World’s Champion of Human Rights,” bears a grave moral responsibility to right the wrongs inflicted by the Chen regime upon its own citizens.

A good place to begin would be righting the wrong done to the principled and courageous opposition leader Fung Hu-hsiang, the Anwar Ibrahim of Taiwan.

Diaoyutai and Pan Green Self-Delusion

Diaoyutai and Pan Green Self-Delusion
Bevin Chu
July 7, 2005

Executive Summary: In 1895, a militarily powerful, territorially expansionist, post-Tokugawa Japan held a gun to China’s head and forced the Manchu court to sign the Makuan Treaty, ceding the island of Taiwan to Japan. Pan Green Quislings have since turned the treaty into a key justification for Taiwan independence. China relinquished Taiwan far too readily, they argue. Who wants to be associated with such a gutless nation? Far wiser to identify with the winning side, Japan. Fast forward to 2005. Fate, in its infinite wisdom, has presented the Pan Green Quislings with the same dilemma as the Qing court. A militarily powerful, territorially expansionist, post-Cold War Japan is holding a gun to the Chen regime’s head and demanding that it cede the Taiwanese island of Diaoyutai. Pan Green Quislings, who long ago tranferred their loyalties to Japan, are bewildered. Japan, in their hearts and minds, is their adopted country. Why is it treating them so shabbily? Pan Green Quislings just don’t get it. Individual exceptions aside, Japan has never considered the Chinese people on Taiwan “their people.” They have always considered them a genetically inferior subject race. The Pan Green Quislings’ infatuation with Japan is a one-sided, unreciprocated love affair. Taiwan is a “valued ally of Japan” only in the Pan Green Quislings’ dreams. Pan Green Quislings will never enjoy the dignity they demand until they do the very thing they consider inconceivable — return to the motherland and reaffirm their identity as Chinese.

The Treaty of Shimonoseki and Taiwan Independence Victimology

On April 17, 1895, a newly industrialized Meiji Japan held a gun to China’s head and forced the technologically eclipsed, militarily defenseless Qing court to sign the humiliating Makuan Treaty, or Treaty of Shimonoseki. Among its many concessions, the treaty ceded the Chinese island of Taiwan to Japan.

Fast forward 110 years, to 2005.

The Pan Green political leadership has turned the Makuan Treaty into a cornerstone of Taiwan independence victimology. These “yong gan di tai wan ren” (brave Taiwanese) insist that the motherland was too cowardly and sacrificed Taiwan too readily. Therefore, they argue, Chinese on Taiwan should feel nothing for the motherland except contempt. Chinese on Taiwan should henceforth think of themselves as “Taiwanese, not Chinese.” “Taiwanese” should establish their own nation independent of “wai lai zheng quan” (foreign political authorities), i.e., their own motherland’s. “Taiwanese” should firmly align themselves with “strategic ally” and “fellow democracy” Japan. Only then will “Taiwanese” be able to “zhan qi lai” (stand tall), “zou chu qu” (walk out into the sunlight), and enjoy “zun yan” (respect).

Reality Rears Its Ugly Head

Taiwanese fishing ships have repeatedly been expelled or detained by Japanese patrol vessels over the past two years after Japan readjusted and expanded its exclusive economic zone to as close as 37km off the coasts of Ilan and Hualien counties.
— Fisherman’s family asks for help to pay Japanese fine, Central News Agency, June 21, 2005


The Diaoyutai Islands

But a funny thing happened on the way to the Promised Land. Reality reared its ugly head. “Strategic Ally” and “fellow democracy” Japan annexed the Taiwanese island of Diaoyutai, along with waters a mere 37km off the northern coast of Taiwan. Japanese Coast Guard vessels intercepted Taiwanese fishing vessels found in “Japanese waters.” Armed Japanese Coast Guard personnel arrested Taiwanese fishermen, forced them to kneel before their captors, slapped them in the face, spit on them, and screamed racial epithets in their ears. Japanese authorities impounded Taiwanese fishing boats and levied fines amounting to tens of thousands of US dollars on their owners.

How have Pan Green political leaders responded? Former president and Pan Green Godfather Lee Teng-hui declared that “Diaoyutai belongs to Japan.” “President” Chen Shui-bian declared that “The issue of fishing rights must be delinked from the issue of territorial sovereignty,” implicitly conceding Japan’s annexation of Taiwanese territory. “Vice-president” Annette Lu attempted to divert public anger from Tokyo to Beijing, in defiance of the fact that it was Japan, not mainland China that had annexed Taiwanese territory and abused Taiwanese fishermen. “Premier” Frank Hsieh, clueless about the fact that Taiwanese fishing boats have had GPS for years, offered to provide Taiwanese fishermen with GPS so they wouldn’t “inadvertently stray into Japanese waters.” Minister of Defense Lee Jye rejected demands from Taiwanese fishermen for ROC Navy intervention, complaining that “We can’t fight Japan because the ROC military can never win against Japan’s Self-Defense forces.”

Diaoyutai Belongs to Taiwan, not Japan

The answer to the question, “To whom does Diaoyutai belong?” is: “Diaoyutai belongs to Taiwan.”

Diaoyutai (in Hanyu Pinying) or Tiaoyutai (in Wade-Giles) is part of Touchen Township. Touchen township is part of Yilan County. Yilan County is part of the Province of Taiwan. The Province of Taiwan is part of the nation of China. The official website of the Republic of China Post Office lists the postal code for the island as “290, Diaoyutai Archipelago.”

Pale Green Taiwan independence Quislings will argue that Taiwan does not belong to the People’s Republic of China. Deep Green Taiwan independence Quislings will argue that Taiwan does even not belong to the Republic of China. Both arguments are irrelevant. Both arguments are beside the point. The current conflict between Taiwanese fishermen and the Japanese Coast Guard is not about whether Taiwan is part of the PRC or the ROC. The current conflict between Taiwanese fishermen and the Japanese Coast Guard is about whether Diaoyutai is part of Taiwan or Japan.

Even Pan Green Quislings cannot argue that Diaoyutai does not belong to Touchen Township. Even Pan Green Quislings cannot argue that Touchen Township does not belong to Yilan County. Even Pan Green Quislings cannot argue that Yilan County does not belong to Taiwan. Pan Green Quislings will argue that Taiwan does not belong to China, but even Pan Green Quislings cannot convincingly argue that Diaoyutai belongs to Japan.

For that matter, even right wing Japanese militarists cannot argue that Diaoyutai belongs to Japan. In 1931, while Taiwan was under Japanese occupation, Taipei County and Okinawa Prefecture quarreled over the jurisdiction of Diaoyutai. A Tokyo court decided in favor of Taipei County. This proves that even during Japanese occupation Daioyutai was part of Taiwan. Therefore when WWII ended in 1945, and in accordance with the Cairo Conference Japan returned Taiwan and Penghu to China, it was simultaneously obliged to return Diaoyutai – a part of Taiwan – to China.

Whether one is a Pan Blue defender of the Republic of China, or a Pan Green agitator for a would-be “Republic of Taiwan,” one fact is beyond dispute. Diaoyutai is not part of Japan. Diaoyutai is part of Taiwan. Officials of the government of the Republic of China, and even would-be officials of a would-be “Republic of Taiwan” are legally and morally obligated to defend Diaoyutai against Japanese attempts at annexation.

Taiwanese fishermen are so disgusted with the Pan Green leadership’s pusillanimous response to Japanese bullying, they have threatened to fly PRC flags instead of ROC flags, knowing that the Japanese Coast Guard is more deferential, less contemptuous toward mainland Chinese fishing boats under the protection of the PLA Navy.

However contemptuous one might feel about Li Hongzhang and the Qing court, they at least fought a war and were defeated before surrendering precious national territory. Pan Green Quislings are giving up without even a fight!

For additional evidence that Diaoyutai belongs to China, see:
Tiaoyutai is Chinese Territory!

Japanization and Pan Green Self-Delusion

War preparations made it necessary for Japan to change its colonial policy in Taiwan… In 1935 Admiral Seizo Kobayashi was appointed governor-general. Japanization [“huang min hua”] was his top priority. Admiral Kobayashi kicked off his Japanization campaign on April 1, 1937 by banishing Chinese from all publications in Taiwan. The campaign aimed at assimilating Taiwan Chinese through requiring them to use Japanese alone in their daily lives, Japanizing their names, and adopting Shintoism and Japanese customs. Taiwan Chinese were encouraged to wear kimono, visit Shinto shrines regularly, and otherwise look every inch like Japanese. Compulsory attendance at Shinto shrines was rigidly enforced. Every Taiwanese household was required to display a kamidana (god shelf) with a miniature Shinto shrine containing taima, a paper charm with the name of the Sun Goddess Amaterasu Omikami on it. Celebration of Chinese festivals was discouraged… Indoctrination in the Japanese spirit was a required course in schools of all levels. Army officers on active duty supervised military training at middle schools and above.
— Plan started to found Asia’s first republic, by Joe Hung, China Post, 2002

That the Pan Green leadership has found itself in its current quandary is hardly an accident. That the Pan Green leadership has painted itself into its current political corner is the predictable result of Pan Green self-delusion, in turn the poisonous legacy of late occupation era Japanization.

Consider the following June 26, 2005 Liberty Times editorial, entitled “Distinguishing friends from foes.”

“Taiwan must learn to recognize its friends from its foes [sic] …if Taiwan cannot distinguish between friend and enemy it may be cast aside by allies and create an opportunity for its enemies to close in. Who are Taiwan’s friends? In the international community where self-interest tops everything else, the friendship of Taiwan’s allies is especially precious… the US and Japan… share common strategic interests and are therefore close partners with us… the joint US-Japanese declaration that the Taiwan issue is of strategic importance is further evidence of this partnership. Who are Taiwan’s enemies? The People’s Republic of China is the enemy… The fishery dispute with Japan did not begin yesterday… But the friendship of the two countries should outside differences of opinion, and negotiaing a mutually beneficial solution is the way to resolve the situation.[sic]”

Or consider the following July 9, 2005 Taiwan News editorial entitled “Love and hate in Taiwan-Japan ties.”

“The people of Taiwan must take clear stock of who presents the greatest threat to their democratic way of life or, in brief, just where our real enemies are. Displaying weakness toward one’s genuine foes and turning a fierce and hate-filled face toward Japan, which is now on balance Taiwan’s friend in international and security affairs, is not the best way to promote Taiwan’s overall interests, including the maintenance of our autonomy, our democratic political system or the economic welfare of our citizens. In this current flap over fishing rights, the Taiwan people can choose to use love or to use hate toward the people of Japan. Our decision whether to use the spirit of “love” to find a way to mutually live and fish together or adopt a stance of “hate” or exclusion of compromise will display the political wisdom of the Taiwan people and may exercise a lasting influence the future relations between our two countries.[sic]”

Never mind the Pan Green Quislings’ embarrassingly inept “Chinglish,” or “Chinese English.” Just look at the Pan Green Quislings’ really serious self-delusions.

Just look at the Pan Green Quislings’ desperate, one-sided love affair with Taiwan’s past colonial exploiter and present foreign aggressor, Japan. Just look at the Pan Green Quisling’s pathetic conviction that acquiescing in Japan’s annexation of Diaoyutai is an acceptable trade for “mutual security,” against their own countrymen, no less. Just look at the Pan Green Quislings’ unrealistic hope that Japan will come riding to the rescue if they ever declare formal independence. Just look at the Pan Green Quislings’ willful blindness to the fact that right wing Japanese militarists hold Taiwanese in utter contempt, and are merely using their former colonial subjects as expendable pawns against their hated strategic rival, China. Just look at the Pan Green Quislings’ refusal to acknowledge that ever since the Meiji Restoration, when Japan’s economy surpassed China’s for the first time in history, right wing Japan militarists have considered the Chinese people congenitally inferior, Taiwanese (Chinese on Taiwan) included.

Governor-General Kobayashi, who inaugurated the colonial authority’s Japanization campaign on April 1, 1937, apparently had a sense of humor. April 1st, after all, is April Fools Day. Kobayashi told Chinese on Taiwan that “Although Chinese were congenitally inferior to Japanese, Chinese who repudiated their Chinese identities would be promoted to Japanese, Second Class.” In short, Kobayashi perpetrated the biggest, most successful April Fools Day joke in the world. Sixty-eight years later, Taiwan independence Quislings who watch passively as Japan gobbles up Taiwanese territory before their eyes, still haven’t gotten the joke.

Respect, Self-Respect, Self-Affirmation

It is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another… it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character… There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard. A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists… leads also to concessions to the favorite nation… by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained… it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, who devote themselves to the favorite nation, to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country… Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter… Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people…
— George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

George Washington, a visionary genius who won the Thirteen Colonies’ independence from their exploitive colonial master, the virtually invincible British Empire, understood the harsh realities of international power politics. The passage from Washington’s Farewell Address, written 209 years ago, could well have been composed written in direct response to the Pan Green Quislings’ fawning adoration of Japan and shrill enmity toward their own motherland and their compatriots.

Nothing is wrong with Taiwanese (Chinese people on Taiwan) wanting to stand tall, walk out into the sunlight, and enjoy respect. This is a perfectly laudable, completely understandable, highly desirable goal.

During KMT Party Chairman Lien Chan’s stunningly successful “Journey of Peace” to the Chinese mainland, CCP Party Secretary Hu Jintao explicitly acknowledged the legitimacy of Taiwanese wanting to “dang jia zuo zhu” (be masters in their own home).

Demands from Taiwanese for respect are not a problem. Within the framework of One China, as former PRC Premier Zhu Rongji once underscored, all kinds of concessions can be made, because any concessions would be made to one’s fellow countrymen.

Demands for respect are a problem only when, as George Washington put it, “ambitious, corrupted, or deluded (i.e., Japanized) citizens, who devote themselves to the favorite nation (Japan)… betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country (China).”

Respect entails self-respect. Before others will respect you, you must first respect yourself. Self-respect in turn, entails self-affirmation. If one respects oneself, one will have no hesitation affirming who one is.

A reluctance to affirm who one is, a determination to pretend one is something one is not, is symptomatic of a deep-seated lack of self-respect. If one is reluctant to affirm who one is, if one is determined to pretend one is something one is not, one has already invalidated oneself at one’s very core. Nothing one can do subsequently will ever make up for this initial act of self-invalidation.

The reluctance of Pan Green Quislings to affirm that they are Chinese, their stubborn insistence that they are “Taiwanese, not Chinese,” their pathetic attempts to spin themselves as “quasi-Japanese,” are all symptoms of the Pan Green Quislings’ profound lack of self-respect. Pan Green Quislings who refuse to affirm who they are, who insist on pretending they are something they are not, have already invalidated themselves at their very core. Nothing they can do subsequently will ever make up for this initial act of self-invalidation.

That right wing Japanese militarists are the ones least likely to grant Pan Green Quislings the respect they crave must be a bitter pill for them to swallow. Japanization was never a naturalization policy. Japanization was never a means of turning Taiwanese into Japanese, Second Class; Japanese, Third Class; or Japanese, Any Class. Japanization was a “divide and conquer” strategy that stroked the egos of Taiwanese Quislings, pretending to elevate them above their mainland compatriots. Japanization was a means of turning Taiwanese into tamed beasts of burden. Japanization was a carrot held out before “Taiwanese, not Chinese” donkeys to get them to pull the Japanese war machine’s cart, and feel good about doing it.

Japan’s flagrant attempt to annex Diaoyutai is a wake-up call. It is a call for Pan Green Quislings to snap out of their Taiwan independence pipe dream. It is a call for Pan Green Quislings to understand that if they want to stand tall, walk out into the sunlight, and enjoy respect, they must stop trying to be Japanese, No Class. They must do the very thing they were brainwashed into considering unthinkable. They must return to their motherland and boldly reaffirm their identity as Chinese, First Class.