Saturday, June 14, 2008

CS Monitor on Cross-Strait Flight Agreement

Jonathan Adams has an excellent piece in the CS Monitor on the recent agreement, full of useful insights and details, covering almost all the main points.

.....Analysts cautioned that Friday's deal was just the first – and easiest – step on the long and difficult road toward reconciliation between the two bitter rivals. Critics in Taiwan said President Ma had made too many concessions to China too soon.
Under the deal, cross-strait charter flights will run on weekends starting July 4, shuttling Chinese tourists and Taiwanese businessmen between eight airports in Taiwan and five in the mainland. Ma hopes to realize regularly scheduled, daily flights by the summer of 2009, and see up to 3,000 Chinese tourists per day come to Taiwan.

Local media also reported that the two sides had raised the issues of joint oil exploration and establishing representative offices in each other's territories to manage exchanges. But Taiwan's government Friday poured cold water on the proposals, saying Taiwan's team had not been authorized to negotiate on those issues. "I don't think that can be accomplished in the foreseeable future," said Mainland Affairs Council vice chairman Chang Liang-jen, referring to the representative offices.

Another sign of lingering suspicions was the fact that weekend charter flights will not take direct routes across the Taiwan Strait. Instead, they must first fly through Hong Kong airspace, because of security concerns. That will add 90 minutes or more of travel time to flights from Taipei to Shanghai or Beijing.

Has the KMT conceded too much? Ask the military:

The roundabout flight path highlights the challenge of squaring the economic benefits of closer cross-strait ties with national security concerns.

Taiwan's military, which must plan for the worst, is leery of allowing Chinese passenger planes to fly directly across the strait. "A jet fighter could hide beneath a 747 and appear to be one airplane on radar," says one Defense Ministry official. "They could use civilian airplanes as camouflage if they want to attack."

Military officials had also hoped that two airports near sensitive airbases on Taiwan's rugged east coast would not receive charter flights from China. Those bases – in Hualien and Taitung – are "the last line of defense for air combat," the defense official says. But the deal includes the two airports.

Still, there are palliatives....

....Andrew Yang, a cross-strait security expert at the Chinese Council of Advanced Policy Studies in Taipei, says that one option under consideration was allowing flights to Shanghai or Beijing to pass through Japanese airspace, which would further reduce flying time.

But he says flights directly across the Taiwan Strait would require negotiated confidence-building measures and "safety corridors." "If there's no guarantee of 'safety corridors,' then it would be easy for the Chinese air force to fully utilize the routes to conduct military strikes," says Mr. Yang. "That would leave Taiwan no time to respond."

Ma has raised a high bar for even starting such security talks, saying that China must first withdraw its missiles aimed at Taiwan. "That's the biggest obstacle that will hamper the negotiation process," says Yang.

China has about 1,400 short-range ballistic missiles deployed along the coast opposite Taiwan, as well as cruise missiles, according to the latest count from the Taiwan government. To help counter that military threat, Taiwan has requested Patriot anti-missile batteries, F-16 fighter jets, submarines, attack helicopters, and other equipment from the US.

But according to a Washington Post story Thursday, the US has delayed approval of $11 billion worth of those and other purchases. The paper reported that Washington had delayed the approval at Taiwan's request, as sensitive cross-strait negotiations proceed.

Taiwan's government declined to comment on that report Friday.

The Washington Post report also said that the Bush Administration had frozen weapons sales to obtain China's cooperation on North Korea's nuclear program. The key actors were said to be Sec. of State Rice, and Stephen Hadley.

Adam's formulaic description of the China-Taiwan sovereignty issue is quite restrained, making no silly references to 1949.

China views self-governed Taiwan as part of its territory, and periodically threatens force to back up its claim. Beijing strongly objects to any US military sales or support for the island.
Taiwan's pro-independence opposition party said Ma was giving up too much to Beijing in order to make good on campaign pledges to boost cross-strait ties.

"The KMT has traded in defense interests for improved cross-strait relations, and this is extremely dangerous," says Lin Chen-wei, director of international affairs for the Democratic Progressive Party, and a former National Security Council official. "We're saying, why are you going so fast? We're very concerned about their strategic direction."

Mr. Lin noted that the pro-independence government had laid the groundwork for Friday's deal in informal talks over the last few years. It negotiated a package deal of cross-strait passenger charter flights, cargo flights, and tourism. But Beijing refused to sign a deal until the more China-friendly KMT retook power last month.

Another sore point is that Friday's deal does not include cross-strait cargo flights. That's high on Taiwan businesses' wish list, because many ship high-tech parts to the mainland for assembly.

According to Lin, Beijing is dragging its feet on such flights because Taiwan's cargo industry is much stronger than China's, and because China wants Taiwanese firms to move their R&D and high technology to the mainland.
Let's see...to obtain the $1-2 billion in revenues from tourists, the KMT has (1) ignored the cargo flights which Taiwan needs; (2) ignored military recommendations that Chinese aircraft not be allowed to fly into certain areas in Taiwan; (3) downplayed the island's sovereignty; and (4) handed off national policy to negotiators from a particular political party. Note that the DPP's sensible program included "a package deal" for cargo flights, direct flights, and tourism. The idea that the DPP's cross-strait policy was "irrational" or "ideological" is strictly a pro-KMT framing.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

There is nothing more likely to start disagreement among people or countries than an agreement.
--E. B. White

Anonymous said...

The article seemed pretty fair for a change. Do you think they're reading your blog Michael, hehe?

Richard said...

These past 8 years that the KMT have used in blaming everything on DPP and how it was their fault... well now they are doing the exact same things that they criticized the DPP of.

Like you said, "irriational" cross-strait policies such as this and also in your previous blog on Japan, and things like name changing of Taiwan back to ROC...

Things are moving very quickly over there, something has to slow it down, otherwise in 4 years we may be within grasp of China.

Anonymous said...

I've been seeing Ma as some kind of Bizarro King Leonidas from the film 300.
Instead of bellowing to his army 'Give them nothing, and take from them everything' Ma has meakly told his 'negotiators' to 'Give them whatever they want, and take only enough to allow the media to spin it as some kind of victory for me'.

Tommy said...

Really though, the KMT negotiators are reaching the limits of what they can give without raising way too many eyebrows. Any other "agreements" can only be made by giving up advantages that Taiwan holds or points of leverage. This will be much more tricky for the KMT. (I can't say "tricky for Ma" with a straight face since he seems to have disappeared. The tail is wagging the dog.) The KMT is not monolithic. The grumbling must start sometime about giving too much.

Anonymous said...

Ma is involved in any of this?

Anonymous said...

The military argument about jets hiding under passenger planes shows how little they are thinking. It would be simple enough to require cameras to be installed on those flights that could monitor the airspace that radar couldn't see properly.

An incredible amount of fuel will be saved from this new arrangement and tourism will be boosted and that can't be all bad, now can it?

Anonymous said...

Ma is involved in any of this?

That is indeed the question, or more to the point, HOW is he involved in this? He certainly seems quiet about this fishing boat affair. His premier says war "is the last option" which may mean "not an option" to some or it could mean "all cards are the table" -- to use Bush-speak.

Behind the scenes, Ma needs Japan's support to counter the KMT hardliners and hardnosed Chinese pols who are trying to run away with government policy. We know Ma and Lee Tenghui are working together, and his MAC chairman comes from Lee's party. There may be other alliances we don't hear about.

To give you an idea of what Ma is probably competing with, do a google of the sabre-rattling KMT legislator, Lin Yufang (the PFP wolf in KMT clothing), who clearly is talking as if he is preparing to run for generallissimo in the next election.

He's the loudest voice calling for the sending of warships to the Senkkakus/Diayoutais.

I am still at a stage where I don't think Ma is the person we should be worried about -- it's the KMT hardliners who hate Ma and want him diminished that are more worrisome.

Anonymous said...

Marc,

Are you suggesting Taiwanese left wingers (liberal use of the term) rush to Ma's side to buttress him against the hardliners and boost him up to a position of power within his party (and can then start pulling him left) like the first Lee administration.

It is interesting to contrast what is going on now with the first Lee administration and how Lee was able to out maneuver the Hao Po Tsuns and reign in his party from the right. Ma seems to be failing at this right now if that is what he intended to do. Maybe Hao learned a lesson from history and was better prepared?

Anonymous said...

Are you suggesting Taiwanese left wingers (liberal use of the term) rush to Ma's side...?

I'm suggesting that we don't let the media mold our perspectives and turn us into reactionaries. It's easy to find evidence to support our worst fears. That's what sells papers.

I'm not suggesting that President Ma is a moderate whom all liberals should support (because, for example, he's not as bad as others).

I don't know for certain what he is, although it's safe to assume he embraces most of his party's ideologies. He believes in an entity called the "ROC" -- the "true" China.

However, instead of proclaiming Ma guilty before he's innocent, I will follow my own suggestion and "wait and see" -- a phrase that I hear uttered among nearly all of my green and blue Taiwanese friends and associates.