U.S, Japan and Australia with hidden motives?

By Mathew Yakai in Changchun， China


ACADEMIAN David Kang purported that threats to the United States in East Asia do not arise from the traditional sources of great powers rivalry and conflict, rather arise from smallest and weakest states like North Korea and Iran.

But the break through in the six party talks has made North Korea to open up recently, yet there is more to be done.

The next “axis of evil”, Iran, is closely monitored so it does not build nuclear plant that would enable for uranium enrichment program.

These threats are not direct, but instead they arise indirectly, if they sell their alleged nuclear weapons to Middle Eastern terrorists group that would use against the United States.

The terrorists can also use these nuclear weapons against U.S allies like Japan, Australia, Britain and others, for supporting her.

U.S. does not face any direct security threats from the East Asian countries. Yet, U.S. interests in the region are as much economic as they are military.

Economic growth, not military conflict, has been the hallmark of the modern East Asian region and U.S. economic ties to the region are deep and growing deeper, including its allies.

But the recent overwhelming “reengagement” by U.S. Japan and traditionally Australia in Oceania is not only interesting but surprising given the fact that all these countries are strong allies, spreading all over the region with their respective economic strengths.

Since the end of Cold War, U.S. closed its small consular post in Solomon Islands, reduces some of its aid program outreach, and no longer maintains a separate Pacific Islands office in the State Department.

In March 2007, a senior State Department official admitted that “the nations of the Pacific have not always received either adequate diplomatic attention or development assistance” and promised a reversal of the trend.

Bush Administration coincidently pledged to “re-engage” with the region and declared last year (2007) the “Year of the Pacific”.

Consequently, Washington’s diplomacy has increased in Oceania with the re-establishment of its Fulbright Scholarship to Pacific Islanders.

U.S. through its Pacific Partnership 2008 program will see a humanitarian civic assistance mission aimed at building international relations with partner nations will visit PNG next month, U.S. embassy in Port Moresby confirmed as reported by The National.

Pacific Partnership in PNG would include the deployment of combined team of U.S. navy personnel and PNG Defence Force engineers to Popodetta this month (July 2008), followed by the hospital ship USNS Mercy’s 13-day visit to Port Moresby next month (August 2008).

This is one of U.S major Oceania diplomacy since the last 30 years after the end of Cold War.

Since Bush became the President, neither him nor his secretary visited any Pacific Island countries, depicting how insignificant these countries are.

But what is very obvious is that Washington controls the region through Canberra, Wellington, Tokyo and United Kingdom.

Recently, Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare acknowledged U.S. army presence in Guam and told Parliament that if U.S. moves its army from Philippines to Guam then PNG stands to benefit from a tune of K20 billion by supplying agricultural produces, reported by The National.

Morobe Governor Luther Wenge who returned from U.S. earlier this year (2008) offered his old Lae airport for U.S. to erect its military base, the first in Oceania apart from Guam, which would have a proximity to any possible enemies that only Wenge knows.

Wenge attempted to attract U.S. capital and create employment for his people but he should also question… “Why such a superpower on PNG soil when Waigani’s foreign policy is, “friend to all and enemy to none”?

Both Wenge and Sir Somare suggested that PNG stands to benefit but they do not see the diplomatic repercussion and the long term relationship with PNG neighbors, especially Indonesia, the largest Muslim state which PNG shares its land border with and China, which has brought a lot of tangible development to PNG when U.S. packed up and left after the Cold War.

When one’s sovereignty is negotiated for military purposes then it must be made sure its foreign policy is not jeopardized…but in this case, both Sir Somare and Wenge did that.

The story does not end there! Recently, Japan, the strong ally of U.S. has offered to be part of the Australian-led regional assistance mission to Solomon Islands, RAMSI.

Interestingly, Japans’ attempt to join RAMSI was discussed with Canberra in Tokyo, and Australia brought it up during the Pacific Islands Foreign Affair Ministers meeting recently.

Though Japan is an important bilateral and development partner, not only to Solomon Islands but to all the Pacific Island countries, its timing and current “re-engagement” policy by U.S. in the region must be seriously considered by the regional governments.

Solomon’s Prime Minister Dr. Derek Sikua has called for caution and says he’s seeking clarification on the offer, but must go further to question why Japan, when the regional “energy” is sufficient with New Zealand and Australia taking the lead.

Besides, the situation in Honiara is back to normal after the inquiry into Honiara’s 2006 Chinatown riots were found to have been politically motivated.

Australian newspaper The Age says the Sikua government has officially apologized to the Chinese community for the riots, which took place after Solomons’ MPs elected Snyder Rini as prime minister following national polls.

Regional leaders must question what Japan will offer and whether its involvement is a directive from Washington through Canberra.

Though Japan’s Pacifist Constitution Article 9 prohibits having its own military force, Japan has been very instrumental with logistics during the Afghanistan and now Iraq unilateral wars by U.S.

Canberra supported the war, literally for oil, against Iraq without the consent of the Pacific Island Regional Forum, showing how they can bully the Island states.

Now all are exhausted. Canberra is withdrawing its army, and U.S. is planning to do as well when the new president gets in, but depends on the situation on the ground.

Pacific Island countries have not fallen into the hands of terrorists, or likely to do so, though they have been termed to be heading towards the “brink of being failed states”.

The Iraqi government, though in power, the resistance is still on, and that’s where U.S. and Japan should focus their resources to protect the vulnerable, the women, children and the old.

Because there is no desperation in Oceania, the Pacific Island leaders would agree that U.S. and its allies should complete their mission in Iraq thoroughly.

Washington Post independently estimates the loss of civilian from the Iraq war to at least 100,000 Iraqi, because of the U.S. invasion.

Wikipedia – The Free Encyclopedia online states that the Iraqi health Ministry survey shows that 151,000 violent deaths out of 400,000 excesses deaths due to the war from march 2003 to June 2006, Lancet survey shows 601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths from March 2003 to June 2006 and Opinion Research Business survey shows 1,033,000 violent deaths as a result of the conflict from march 2003 to August 2007.

The mission is incomplete and the death tally will still increase.

But U.S. and Japan’s move to Oceania coincidently, though Japan was there before, should stimulate a lot of debate in the region, including our political leaders.

International situation reveals that the recent trend in the Pacific by both Japan and U.S. is to contain China’s cordial bilateral relationship with the Island countries.

To go further, the two countries try to contain China, when Bijing tries to be genuine partner in terms of economic development which the developing countries have benefited a lot since the 1970’s.

The ambition by U.S and Japan must be stopped by the island leaders because what Japan and U.S. are attempting at is directly interfering in regional sovereignty by denying what China has to offer.

Sufficiently, Canberra has a growing conflict between the material benefits associated with Australia’s deepening relationship with Beijing, and the broad security concerns it shares with the U.S.

China is making its new, more robust, presence felt around the globe, including in Oceania and the benefits to the Island countries have been overwhelming.

Yet, China’s immediate interest are not much different from those of other powers active in the region, such as U.S., Japan, New Zealand, and Australia.

The major difference is that these powers are well established in Oceania while China is not.

Most other influential actors have engaged with Pacific Islands societies for more than a century, initially as colonists.

And the drastic move by Japan and U.S. will have tremendous economic set back in the region, and this must be seriously considered by the island countries.

Cooperation between Australia, Japan, U.S. and China in Oceania for the Island countries economic development is welcome, but not a power politics, the replica of “Cold War”.

China’s foreign policy always remains, “non interference in another countries sovereignty and win-win diplomacy”.

What is U.S., Japan and Australia’s economic policy towards Oceania, given that they have set precedence already?

Should Oceania trust them to be good “great powers”, despite the fact that their hands are still covered with Iraqi’s blood?

Anyway, at least for the moment, China appears to broaden the menu of options for these island states, whose leaders are well accustomed to operating in a world controlled by great powers.

Note: “Asia-Pacific Perspective: China +” looks at Chinese society, culture, economy, governance and China’s role within the Asia-Pacific region and the world over. It mainly focuses on how Oceania can learn from China’s experience. The writer is a PNG student in China

30th March, 2008

China's rise: A threat?

By Mathew Yakai in Changchun

CHINA is a developing country, yet the fastest growing economy, becoming the third largest after Japan.

Its’ political and economic signs depicts that China is getting a global prominence while maintaining its regional power in all corners of Asia Pacific, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean.

Coincidently, China is moving towards being a democracy in the past three decades.

Many will not live longer to see China after 20 to 40 years but every signs show that China will have a huge impact on the regional and world politics and economics given its current growth.

But if there is one thing that we all feel and experience as far as China is concerned then it’s the China’s presence in our kitchen, living rooms, dining tables and even the clothes we wear, ‘the China made products’.

Let me put it on record that “China made products” are of good quality and very cheap, giving us a choice.

Last year, Washington had a diplomatic stand-off with Beijing over “China made toys”. Only last month, Tokyo had the stand-off with Beijing over the alleged dumpling poisoning (food) exported to Japan.

America apologized after finding out that there were no fault with the toys.

Tokyo did a thorough investigation with the help from Beijing for possible food poisoning but to no avail, bringing back a likely diplomatic stand-off on track.

In PNG, we had the “tooth paste saga”. Unfortunately, our scientific capability is below standard and samples have been sent overseas for investigation.

But the local media have already tarnished Beijing’s reputation over the “tooth paste issue” like what American media did to China toys. America apologized later but PNG has not and this is an outstanding issue.

PNG government must build its scientific research institutions that can cater for any experiments, like in the case of “tooth paste” so that the finding is independent and credible.

We can not trust any results provided by overseas laboratories that have the opportunity to manipulate the findings for various reasons. Our educational institutions and scientist are capable to carry out experiments if more funds are allocated.

China made products, both soft and hard wares have penetrated almost all the countries, both big and small.

Some see China’s growth as a threat, few see as an opportunity but many will definitely appreciate when they benefit from what China is providing.

Coupled with its “global” presence in all forms and size, many see China as a “threat”. Scholars watch closely China’s rapid economic growth and predict that this pose serious threat in world peace.

“China’s fall a threat” is the line most scholars and commentators ignore in their arguments.

Since opening up three decades ago, China has developed its economy impressively. This has provoked observers to conclude that “China’s rise” is a threat to both regional and world peace.

This is in line with ‘realists’ thesis that a rising power will stimulate rivalry in power politics, definitely against U.S.A. Even American policy makers see China as a threat and propose for “engagement” and “containment” policies.

However, Asian scholars argue that “China’s rise is a peaceful rise”.

Scholar Samuel Kim in his article “Chinese Foreign Policy in Theory and Practice” sets out clearly the notion of China’s threat given its economic growth.

“For good or otherwise, Beijing managed to capture global prime time, with a “rise of China” chorus in the global marketplace turning into the “rise of China threat” debate in the Asia Pacific region in general and United States in particular.”

Kim further imply that the fall of former Soviet Union that now reveals China as a growing power, with the potential to challenge the only hegemony, United States. China with its vast land mass and 1.3 billion people and double digit economic growth might seem a potential threat to America.

Scholars have also promoted the notion of “China’s rise is a threat”. Existing literature and journalistic works are overwhelming.

Economic development is inevitable when technological know how is at its advantage stages. The French revolution, pax-Britannica, and pax-America have shown that when human knowledge is extended, follows forthwith is the tangible economic developments.

For China’s last three decades of impressive economic growth is understandably an inevitable growth given its mobility from being a developing country to its current stages.

For Kim to depict that China’s rise is a threat to the world is unfounded and no theoretical framework has been established to explain his hypothesis. Kim failed in his analysis to state as to what will happen if China “falls” from its current economic growth.

No scholar or even an existing literature states that “China’s fall is a threat” to world peace.

If China collapses now, imagine what would happen to the 1.3 billion people.

The country would shake my humble prediction. But that’s not what we want to see happening in China.

So, what Kim and others predict that “China’s rise is a threat” is a non issue. Instead, they should look on the other side of the coin where “China’s fall is a threat”.

Scholar Brantly Womack in his “China between region and World” rightly states that, “China is arguably the country most difficult to understand, and the country most important to interpret correctly.

The difficulty derives primarily from great disparities of situation – history, culture and politics.” China’s history goes back 5,000 years and when there is a history, culture accompanies it. Politics is an inbuilt characteristic of humanity.

So, can we say that for one to rightly understand China’s foreign policy, he must be well versed with China’s 5,000 years old history? The answer is both yes, and no, depending on the issue at hand.

Given China’s prominence and strength, it is a single state, a regional power and a global presence.

China is not actually a global power but its presence globally can be felt, but definitely it’s a regional power and a “central kingdom”. Given these, Kim rightly states that elites in China draw their foreign policy by looking at domestic sources.

Likewise, policy specialists are human beings by nature and consider their domestic polity.

Where then “international polity” comes in. Again for China as a “global presence” given its economic strength and being the member of the Security Council, China remains a responsible stake holder and its foreign policy should responsibly made.

Let me state that China is unlikely to become a “global power” in the foreseeable future but definitely, its “global presence” is of significance to other states.

Womack concluded by saying that China is a clear “Central Kingdom” and is still a center, though not the center of the world.

But he failed to mention the fact that the “Central Kingdom” will collapse or get into conflict with other countries if its foreign policies are not handled diplomatically, especially in “China rise threat” theory.

Globalization is a form of institutionalized dependency and every country do depend on each others.

China has the largest market in America and thus, diplomatic relations between Washington and Beijing is of paramount importance.

Diplomatic relations between Port Moresby and Beijing is also important and indeed it is necessary.

This is not Beijing’s “soft power diplomacy” as stated by Womack. For the developing countries, this is necessary because China has a lot to offer.

In Womack’s words, “China’s external power is “soft” in the sense that it can persuade other states to cooperate on mutually beneficial objectives, but it can not force them to comply with China’s wishes. This is in line with China’s current foreign policy, “win-win” diplomacy and “non-interference” policy.

Beijing does not interfere in one country’s sovereignty. However, USA, Australia, Britain and other countries blame Beijing for not playing its aid diplomacy by the existing rules.

But “soft power” is properly accommodated when China and other countries mutually accept any negotiation.

Realists say that China’s rise will promote rivalry, but idealists say that China’s rise would promote peace and harmony, as international norm’s and values are accommodated.

China is a responsible state. After becoming the member of the World Trade Organization, it made sure all China made products are globally accepted.

Politically, China has taken a leading role on many regional and international issues like the ongoing Six Party Talks regarding the North Korean nuclear issue, implementation of Kyoto Protocol and settling the Darfur crises.

Militarily, China has contributed its forces to the war torn region through the UN Peace Keeping Force and conducted joint military exercise to curb any global threats.

Thus, China promotes peace globally, is willing to help the developing countries in the region while rescuing its 1.3 billion people out from poverty.

For USA to blame China for its alleged substandard toys is a joke when every families in America look forward to buying Chinese made toys for their children as present.

China’s dumpling to Japan is not only cheap and ready prepared but delicious. And who goes to work without brushing his teeth?

From toy to dumpling and the tooth paste, these issues have the potential for a possible diplomatic stand-off.

But interesting enough, China’s economic growth has provided enormous opportunities around the world, thus, “dragons’ rise is peaceful”.

NB: The writer is a PNG student studying in China

25th July, 2008

China in the Pacific: The Implication for Washington

By Mathew Yakai in Changchun

BEIJING is amongst other major external powers in the Pacific Island region. Others include United States, Australia, New Zealand, France, Britain and Japan.

Given China’s presence, many scholars, unfortunately from the West continuously accuse China for trying to explore resources, by comparing Island countries to Africa.

But China’s whatever interest it may be in the Pacific, will it have any political, economic and strategic implication on Washington and what will be the new U.S. President to be elect’s attitude towards Beijing’s presence in the Pacific.

Also, the President to be elected Nov. 4 2008 will continue with Bush Administration’s 2007 “re-engagement” policy with the region, and what will be his goal? Will he work along with Beijing, and other regional powers as developmental partners, or we will see another “cold war” rivalry?

In 2008, the Bush Administration pledged to “re-engage” with the region and declared 2007 the “Year of the Pacific”.

Among the main topics, aims, and initiatives under discussion at the Pacific Island Conference of Leaders held in Washington , DC, in March 2007: expanding U.S. public diplomacy efforts and foreign aid activities, strengthening US-Pacific trade and preferential trade programs for the Pacific island countries, address global warming and other environmental concerns in the region, and enhancing educational and cultural exchanges.

Many scholars think that the “re-engagement” by US is due to China’s heightened regional profile, which has been generally welcomed by local leaders but regarded with suspecision by Western commentators protective of an area long regarded as America’s backyard.

However, there is no indication that Western neglect has facilitated China’s rise in the hemisphere, nor that Beijing intends to challenge U.S. leadership in the region.

It is unlikely that U.S. neglect or pre-occupation with other parts of the world have made Oceania vulnerable to China’s increased influence.

China has a growing interest in the resources of the region, particularly gas and minerals in Papua New Guinea. That happens with any countries around the world.

However, China’s presence is also to gain support of island states on a range of political issues, most notably its ongoing efforts to isolate Taiwan.

China, thus, goes to the pacific with its “soft loan” with no strings attached, as opposed to other loans from Western countries with strings attached, mostly takes longer period to approve.

For China, loans and assistance are given after short meetings or discussions, humbly welcomed by the island leaders, given their desperate economies.

This makes Western countries to accuse Beijing for corrupting the Pacific island countries for its “dollar diplomacy” when not playing by the established rules.

Many scholars have associated the 2006 up rise against the people of Asian origin in Solomon Islands to Beijing and Taiwan’s “dollar diplomacy” that allegedly influenced the domestic politics. But there is no evidence that China has singled out Oceania for special attention.

China was part of the allied powers during the Cold War period to prevent communism from spreading to the region.

America, then left the Oceania under the guise of Canberra, New Zealand, Britain and other partners after the collapse of former Soviet Union, suspended all its programs and even embassies.

Canberra and New Zealand with few other allies became Washington’s “eyes and ears”. These countries also engaged in many developmental and economic programs that were left isolated by Washington.

But the Island leaders recently showed the Western powers that they have other options, to “look north” to China. Papua New Guinea and Fiji with other Pacific Island countries now recognize the “one china policy”.

This is in line with Beijing’s attempt to isolate Taiwan. But although China’s rise disturbs a situation where a small number of allied powers exercise an enormous amount of regional influence, all of these regional actors have growing entanglements with China – and compelling reasons to avoid confrontation. USA is no exception.

Beijing stands apart from this consortium of donors, offering support but asking little beyond recognition of “One China” policy.

USA and other Western powers have no option but to accept, barring significant setbacks, China is in the Pacific to stay.

They can do little but urge Beijing to play by the rules they have established and enforced for decades. It may be USA and its allies in the region rather than China that ultimately have to compromise.

The Oceania does not pose any threat to democracy or American values, as in Iraq and Afghanistan, and allegedly Iran and North Korea.

Pacific Island leaders want peace, harmony and economic prosperity on the bases of good governance and accountability. The island countries perhaps need a regional leader to lead towards common economic prosperity then lead for its self interest.

When U.S. pulled out all its programs after the Cold War, New Zealand, Australia, Britain and other Western powers worked along with the regional governments. But since then, no tangible developments have been achieved. Few we see today are replica of neo-colonialism.

Today, economic indicators show that no improved economic progresses have been made. All seen today are half decaying buildings and infrastructures of colonial “masters”, especially Australia.

On the other hand, China is not a new comer in the Pacific. Chinese were in the Pacific, example, Papua New Guinea during the colonial period, or even before. But China’s presence today provides an option to the Island countries as a developing country itself.

Beijing’s initiative has been welcomed by the pacific leaders. Prime Ministers and leaders from Island countries who recognize the “One China” policy make their first state visit to Beijing then their traditional partners like USA, Australia, New Zealand and Britain. Beijing welcomes them with a red carpet treatment.

The 2007 “Year of the Pacific” declared by the Bush Administration has sent a signal throughout the region, particularly to Beijing because of the allegation that Beijing’s presence in the Pacific was closely monitored by Washington.

This is a clear indication of America’s attempt to “contain” China’s expansion in the region, a bold “cold war” mentality in this century.

Conclusively, this will be treated as the second Cold War between the largest remaining communist state and the world’s most powerful nation. At the end, the Pacific Island countries suffer economically, because such rival is for their own interest, as seen during the Cold war period between USA and former USSR.

Obama and Clinton are liberal, in the sense that they both disagree with Washington’s military engagement in Iraq.

Fair enough because Bush declared victory over the Afghanistan war but still got stuck in there. For how long? Obama and Clinton, who gets the top post then, can decide.

But mind you, a complete withdrawal is not a solution, but a disaster to the people there, that USA initially proclaimed to liberate.

The result of USA being in Iraq and Afghanistan is the result of unilateral approach, a typical realist mentality. A lesson for Obama and Clinton to learn.

That's in Iraq, where oil is the prime target for USA, as opposed to humanitarian liberation. In the Pacific, what does USA want, when Bush made known his 2007 “re-engagement policy”?

This will be made, even clearer when either Obama or Clinton becomes the President of United States in this years (2008) election.

America’s “re-engagement” in the Pacific is both welcoming, but suspicious at the same time.

For what ever reasons, Pacific Island leaders will work with a liberal President, then a realist. Definitely, not another George Bush, both the son and father.

In the Pacific, USA should come as a development partner, and not to “contain” China, because Island leaders know who is genuine. They are not new in regional and world politics.

Note: Asia-Pacific Perspective: China + looks at Chinese society, culture, economy, governance and China’s role within the Asia Pacific region and the world over. It mainly focuses on how PNG can learn from China’s experience. The writer is a PNG student in China.

25th May 2008

China unites for Summer Olympic Game

By Mathew Yakai in China

CHINA has seventy-four more days as off today before the grand opening of Beijing Olympic in August 8.

But I keep on questioning my self after seeing disturbing footages of the Monday 12 Sichuan earthquake of 7.9 magnitude that left thousands death, thousands missing, and thousands left in temporary shelters.

Not only me asking the question, but many foreigners and Chinese are asking, “What the hell is happening to China at this point in time when the Olympic Game is coming up?”

When China opened its door to the outside worlds 30 years ago (1978), it experienced an unprecedented economic growth in the human history.

Many scholars, journalists and individuals have paid close attention to this vast, over populated and yet a fascinating country with 5,000 years old history.

Many things happened in the past 30 years, importantly, Beijing rapidly built official diplomatic ties with other countries, including Papua New Guinea and other Pacific Island countries.

Since the International Olympic Committee selected Beijing to host this year summer game, Beijing had gone through a lot of scrutiny from the international community, with both negative and positive assessment.

This is purely power-politics, as realists argue, because nation states, like individuals, always want to maximize their own interest in a world of scarce resources and competition.

China is no exception!

But the largest remaining communist state, after the collapse of the former USSR at the end of the “Cold War” (1991) has proven its critiques wrong.

Those who have been to China will agree with me that the 1.3 billion people have adequate food, basic government services reach almost all household.

The communist party puts the 1.3 billion people first, as seen in this recent earthquake.

In January this year, China was hit hard by the heaviest snowfall in decades. When the country was preparing for its Lunar New Year, thousand of commuters were stranded in train stations, bus stations, even the major airports .

Across China around nineteen airports have shut because of the weather. Around half the provinces in the country have had to start rationing power, according to the state media.

The government has suspended coal exports in favor of home consumption. At least a dozen people died because of heavy rains and the snowfall.

The Spring Festival is China's most important holiday when people journey home to be with their families. For millions of the country's migrant workers it's their only holiday.

Some two billion journeys were made during the festival last year, making it the largest migration of people on the planet.

Like in the current earthquake disaster, the top leaders including Premier Wen Jiabao and President Hu Jintao travelled the country, visited and dined with the stranded passengers.

When the Olympic Torch made its world tour to Paris and London, Anti-Chinese protesters disturbed its scheduled journey, claiming protest over China’s policy towards Tibet and Darfur.

For the good of my readers, it is worth mentioning that Tibet is a province of Great China and any issue on Tibet remains China’s own. The international community knows that.

Because of the Tibet up-rise recently, French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced his protest over the Beijing Olympic.

Immediately, the world leaders, including George Bush, and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown accused Sarkozy for putting sports and politics together.

Also, French was warned not to interfere in China’s internal politics.

I also mentioned in my previous commentary that China is doing a lot to help solve the Darfur issue. It is not China’s issue, but concerns humanity, thus the world should put hands together.

Then the issue of Chinese made toys (products) in June last year. The toys were recalled because of the concern about paint containing lead, which has been outlawed for use on U.S toys since 1978.

The “toy issue” almost prompted diplomatic stand off between Beijing and Washington. Upon corporative scientific test, results have shown that no injuries were caused by the paint on the toys. Washington eventually apologized.

In late January this year, Tokyo and Beijing had the debacle over “dumpling case”, which was alleged the result in 10 people falling ill in Japan.

The populous and delicious Asian food is processed in China and exported to Japan.
Investigators inspected the manufacturer, Tianyang Food Plant in Hebei Province, but found nothing irregular.

They also found no problems related to the purchase of raw materials or the production process.
China also sent two groups of experts to Japan for joint investigations.

After a thorough investigation, the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine said in late February that the dumpling poisoning incident was an individual, deliberate case, not a case of food safety resulting from pesticide residue.

Given the historical back ground of Tokyo and Beijing, the “dumpling issue” had the potential to impact badly on the relationship between the two countries, if authorities had not handled the issue with such a care.

China is very careful with its food manufacturing products. I consume Chinese made food, and other products. Any restaurants in my current Changchun home provide the best delicious menu, never experienced in PNG .

On Monday, Sichuan earthquake killed more then 41 thousand people and other thousands left homeless. Some thousand of people are still missing till today.

The world is watching closely on how China will take care of this massive humanitarian natural disaster in its modern history.

The communist party, under its new generation of leadership, have mobilized all its top commodities, and entered the affected area within four hours after the earthquake. Resources are still flooding in, from within and abroad.

China is faced with huge challenge, from international, regional and domestic levels to natural disaster, when Beijing is preparing for the Olympic Game this summer.

Outsiders always have bad impression of China, the country I start to fall in love with. Foreign media have regularly tarnished China’s image over issues that only concern China.

This earthquake disaster and other issues that China has handled with great caution will not tarnish China’s effort to host the Olympic Game in August.

Instead, the experiences have made the 1.3 billion people of China united, to stand together to fight their common enemy, as shown in this natural disaster and handling of their past problems and issues.

Sadly, loved ones have perished under the debris of collapsed buildings, but this disaster has united the 1.3 billion people, and they are now confident to host the Olympic Game, under the burner, “One World-One Dream”, aiming at imparting peace throughout the world.

Former US President, Richard Nixon, before resigning voluntarily after the Watergate scandal in 1974, gave a speech to his staff, “It is only a beginning, always.

The young must know it, the old must know it. It must always sustain us, because the greatness comes not when things go always good for you, but the greatness comes and you are really tested, when you take some knocks, some disappointments, when sadness comes, because only if you have been in the deepest valley, can you ever know how magnificent it is to be on the highest mountain.”

China’s President Hu Jintao rightly puts it when comforting his earthquake affected people, “I firmly believe that no difficulty can daunt the Chinese people.”

The experiences China goes through is an experience that will make China realize its weakness, and further improve its effort in enhancing its peoples life, and even further improve and strengthen bilateral relationship with other countries.

Papua New Guinea stands to benefit, as long as our two governments work together.
China’s experience is definitely other countries lesson to learn. Because, this great nation is heading towards becoming a better nation, if not, it is one.

Great China, with the 1.3 billion people, when their love and strength is put together for the betterment of the Olympic Game after going through the earthquake disaster, it will send fort 1.3 billion effect.

Welcome to Beijing for the Olympic and feel and experience the love of 1.3 billion people of China.
The Summer Olympic will take China up to a new height, the hill of prosperity and the 1.3 billion people will appreciate how magnificent it is to be on the highest mountain after being down in the lowest valley.

Note: Asia-Pacific Perspective: China + looks at Chinese society, culture, economy, governance and China's role within the Asia Pacific region and the world over. It mainly focuses on how Oceania can learn from China's experience. The writer is a PNG student in China.

25th January 2008

America and the Taiwan question

By Mathew Yakai in Changchun, China

THIS MONTH alone has seen a lot of foreign dignitaries visiting China on official trips.

The highest foreign dignitary was the British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, his first overseas official trip since taking office late last year.

On January 13, India's Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh paid an official three-day visit to China to boost relations with its neighbor.

He met with both President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao. The Indian leader called engagement with China an "imperative necessity."

Another delegation from South Korean government visited Beijing to acknowledge and strengthen the two countries bilateral ties.

The Foreign Minister of the Southeastern African country, Malawi also visited Beijing to complete the signing of bilateral relationship with Beijing, after ending the 42 years of recognizing Taiwan.

From the United States of America was Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Pacific Command Timothy Keating. During his visit, he conducted a wide exchange of views on Sino-US military ties, the Taiwan issue and international and regional issues of common concern.

Mr. Keating assured China of Washington’s recognition of One China Policy, likewise other countries.

But Mr. Keating’s meeting in Beijing is interesting. I would confidently say that even Washington recognize the One China Policy, if Beijing tries to use force to unite Taiwan with Great China then Washington will inevitably intervene. Even, America can use force if it thinks fit.

Last week I strongly worded that Honiara should shift allegiance to Beijing and the reasons why it should.

In this commentary, I will state the United State’s policy towards Taiwan, while recognizing the One China Policy. This is important because U.S. is coincidently recognizing the One China Policy and protecting Taiwan from any aggression by Beijing.

Briefly, I should mention that U.S. does not support Taiwan’s independence but only promotes a peaceful solution in the strait, in any way agreed by the two sides.

Some of our leaders in the Pacific may be ill-informed that Washington is supporting Taiwan’s independence. This is not the case here.

So what is really America’s role given that the Taiwan issue pose a possible war if there is a simple misunderstanding between the relevant parties, especially Beijing and Taipei, and possibly Washington.

Well, U.S foreign policy from the 1890’s to the present has been based on two general principles – support for capitalist economic systems (free market economies) and the democratic political regimes (the free world).

As a liberal political democracy with a capital economic system, these two foreign policy principles were in perfect accord with United State’s national interest.

Although the economic principles were general, most important in terms of national security or power politics, the political principle was never completely absent.

Both the American government leaders and the American people generally believe in the superiority and desirability of democratic institutions.

In the sixty years since Dec 7, 1941, USA Foreign Policy has been enormously successful in protecting both America national interests abroad and fostering the growth of liberal democratic regimes through the projection of American power and diplomacy.

It has been so successful that by 1989 the US was the only so-called superpower left in the world.

The successful twentieth-century United States foreign policy, so beneficial to the United States itself, was also of enormous social, economic and political benefit to hundreds of millions of people throughout the world. Indeed it helped to establish some of America’s strongest economic competitors in Japan, Germany and the European Community.

Taiwan’s Foreign Policy is also based on capitalist economic system and democratic political regimes due to strong allies with America. Thus, Washington’s commitment towards Taiwan besides recognizing the One China Policy is wholly due to Taiwan’s promotion of democracy as opposed to Beijing.

However, China opened its door to the outside world 30 years ago, and today it enjoys a healthy trade and economic relations with most of the countries of the world. The early visit by the high dignitaries depicts the important role China is playing and will be playing from today on.

But the question is the role that Washington playing in the Taiwan issue which is of important not only to US-China-Taiwan relationship but the world over.

At any rate, in 1949 and 1950, the US proclaimed that it had no interest in Taiwan. Then in 1951, North Korea, goaded on by both Stalin and Mao, invaded North Korea, and the US led UN’s forces in a war that re-established the 38th parallel as the division between North and South Korea.

This was the only time since the end of the Chinese empire that United States armed forces have ever fought against the armed forces of China.

From that time on, the United States has been the main economic and security support for the republic of China on Taiwan, and the Republic of (South) Korea, both of which gradually developed into economic powerhouses with interestingly representative and democratic political systems.

At the same time the Democratic People’s Republic of (North) Korea gradually declined to its present state of starvation and dictatorship.

From 1950 to 1979, the United States did not recognize the People’s Republic of China and its government in Beijing. There was diplomatic contact, however.

From 1955 to 1971, representative of the US and China met over a hundred times, but as Zhou Enlai would later tell Henry Kissinger, nothing was really accomplished.

Then after secret negotiation in 1971, Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger made their famous 1972 opening toward China in the same year that the People’s Republic took over China’s seat on the U.N. Security Council, pushing out the Republic of China on Taiwan.

China’s overriding concern from the beginning of this rapprochement was the question of Taiwan.

As Zhou Enlai put it, “It goes without saying that the first question to be settled is the crucial issue between China and United States which is the question of the concrete ways of the withdrawal of all U.S. armed forces from Taiwan and the Taiwan Strait areas.”

These Kissinger-Zhou conversations led to Nixon’s historic visit to China and his meetings with Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai.

The later meetings provided the substance of the new US-China relationship and led eventually to the first of the “three communiqué” which, together with the “Taiwan Relations Act” of 1979 have constituted the formal documentary bases of this relationship for the past 30 years.

After the Shanghai Communiqué, of February 27, 1972, the first practical results of the Nixon-Kissinger breakthrough were a lessening of US-China tension and pressure on the Soviet Union to negotiate the SALT 1 arms limitation treaty.

The “Joint US-China Communiqué” or Shanghai Communiqué did not, however, contain as strong a statement on Taiwan as Kissinger’s July 9, 1971 statement to Zhou.

Both sides stated their view of the world situation and especially the situation in Asia, called for world peace, and a normal relationship between their two countries.

As with the Kissinger-Zhou talks, Taiwan was the main problem area in US-China relations. The Chinese stated their position categorically.

“Taiwan question is the crucial question obstructing the normalization of relations between China and the United State, the Government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government of China; Taiwan is a province of China which has long been returned to the motherland: the liberation of Taiwan is China’s internal affair in which no other country has the right to interfere, and all US forces and military installations must be withdrawn from Taiwan. The Chinese Government firmly opposes any activities which aim at the creation of “One China, One Taiwan,” “One China two governments,” “two China,” and “independent Taiwan,” or advocate that “the status of Taiwan remains to be determined.”

To this the US responded, in a lawyerly manner less definite than Kissinger’s earlier response.

“United States acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China.

The US government does not challenge that position. It reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves.

With this prospect in mind, it affirms the ultimate objective of the withdrawal of all US forces and military installations from Taiwan.

In the meantime, it will progressively reduce its forces and military installations on Taiwan as the tension in the area diminishes.”

The Chinese position is unequivocal and has changed little in thirty years.

Seven years later, on January 1, 1979, the United States formally recognized the People’s Republic of China on Taiwan and a joint communiqué was signed.

The “Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations between the People’s Republic of China and the United States of America” is much shorter then the Shanghai communiqué.

The three key statements included are; USA recognize Beijing as the legal government and the people of US will maintain cultural, commercial and other unofficial relations with Taipei; USA and PRC will uphold the Shanghai communiqué, USA recognize that there is but One China and Taiwan is part of China.

The “Taiwan Relations Act” was passed in the US Congress on March 29, 1979 and signed into law on April 10, in order to make it possible for the Carter administration to recognize the PRC and withdraw its recognition from the ROC as the legitimate government of China.

It was designed to assure the continuation of both US interest in Taiwan and the security of the people of Taiwan.

The text clarifies and amplifies many aspect of official US-China-Taiwan policy.

Certain part of the Act commits US to protecting and even enhancing the “human rights” of the people of Taiwan, to supplying Taiwan with “necessary” defensive weapons, and to maintaining also “the capacity of the US itself to resist the use of any kind of force against Taiwan.

When early in his presidency, George Bush warned China that the US would come to the aid of Taiwan in case of war. He was only stating openly an official US policy that previous presidents had downplayed in the interest of diplomacy.

Most galling to the PRC, the question of US arms sales to Taiwan remained a difficult problem.

Two important points need to be made here. From August 17, 1982 to this day is over 20 years and would certainly seem to qualify as a “long-term policy” one in which arms sales to Taiwan have greatly increased.

Thus the PRC claim that the US is not living up to the “three communiqués”.

From June 1995 to September 11, 2001, the PRC did anything but “adopt measure and create condition conducive to a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan issue.

June 1995 was when former Taiwan President Lee suddenly announced that he regarded Taiwan-China relations as “state-to-state, or at least special state-to-state relations.”

First PRC fired short-range missiles and staged live-fire war games and air exercises in the Taiwan Straits between July and November 1996 and then they started a massive missile buildup on the South China Coast.

There are now some 350 missiles aimed at Taiwan and the build up is expected to reach 600 or more.

The US can make an equally strong argument that the PRC has not lived up to the three communiqués.

In June and July 1998, when Clinton visited Shanghai, he became the first US President to openly proclaim Henry Kissinger’s 1971 “three no’s” policy: no to US support for “One Taiwan, One China,” “no US support for an independent Taiwan”, and “no US support for Taiwan membership in the UN.

His statement set off a debate as to whether this was a new policy or morally an open statement of the long-time US policy.

Whatever policy Beijing and Taipei come up with, Washington should not interfere, except when there is likelihood of force exerted on Taiwan. On the other hand, Washington should not give wrong signals to Taiwan to insist for independence. It is up to Beijing to decide as it’s an internal matter.

For the Pacific Island countries who support either Beijing or Taiwan must remember that the issue is fragile, and most importantly, Taiwan is part of China and China alone can negotiate to solve the Taiwan Strait issue.

Liu Huagiu, then Director of the Foreign Affairs office of the State Council puts; “Mankind will soon stride into the twenty-first century. The world wants peace.

Countries want stability, economies need to be developed and mankind wants progress – all these have become the mainstream of the present time. Peace and development are still the two outstanding themes of the world.”

With the Beijing Olympic in August, the world will come to Beijing. China will not only offer the “great game” of all time but also its thousand years old history.

The Olympic theme is rightly put; “One World, One Dream”.

Athletes will come, strive for “gold”, but one important fact is that the West will come to meet East, North to come and meet south. It will be beyond the Olympic

What humanity needs today are peace, harmony and prosperity. China promotes that in its foreign and economic policies.

If US keeps on playing its ‘card game’ on the issue then we all know very well that US alone benefits from this issue by selling arms to Taiwan.

But a simple miscalculation by any of the three parties, Taiwan-USA and China, turning the Taiwan Strait into a pool of “blood” then this will be “unfortunate” in the twenty first century.

All we want is PEACE, especially after what Beijing Olympic will provide.

Note: “Asia-Pacific Perspective: China +” looks at Chinese society, culture, economy, governance and China’s role within the Asia Pacific region and the world over. It mainly focuses on how Oceania can learn from China’s experience. The writer is from PNG studying in China

23rd March 2008

China is not responsible for Darfur crises

By Mathew Yakai in Changchun, China

STEVEN Spielberg, the Hollywood film director pulled out of his involvement with this year’s Beijing Olympics in protest at China’s alleged role in atrocities in Darfur.

In the most embarrassing public relations set-back yet to the Chinese government’s hosting of the Games, Spielberg, who was due to be an advisor for the opening and closing ceremonies in August, said he could no longer live with his conscience over his position.

His resignation stems from allegations that China has been a notable ally of the Sudanese government, buying its oil and selling its arms, and has threatened to veto United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions on the African country for massacres in Darfur, in the south of the country.

Darfur crises is a very sensitive issue to discuss. But I am compelled to share my observation because China’s presence in the Pacific is enormous and it is likely that many commentators will use Darfur crises to warn any Pacific Island countries to be cautious when dealing with China.

Researchers and the so called scholars have in the past done that, particularly on China’s “cold power” in the region.

China is now both the “regional power” with “global presence” and Pacific islanders will live with their Chinese friends. So, it is important we are well aware on the issue and China’s role in solving it.

When I refer to China as a “regional power” I mean that China has some leverage, in both economic and politics in the region, apart from other regional powers like India, Japan, Russia to name the few. But China does not interfere in the politics of other countries.

In “global presence” some scholars argue that China is a “global power” but I disagree. If there is any global power then it’s only U.S.A. Countries only feel China’s “global presence”.

Even though China is a veto power, and its presence being felt globally, China still remains a third world country.

But China, like any countries has done well in both regional and global politics when it comes to diplomacy. China’s interest in Darfur and any African countries is just the same as any regions of the world, including the Pacific.

China has healthy bilateral relationship with Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Australia, New Zealand and other regional governments.

China also has investments in the Pacific region, like in Africa, South America and Asia. In PNG, Ramu Nickel project is the single largest investment from China worth millions of Kina that will benefit both the local and national economy.

Beijing also provides aid to the regional governments without any strings attached and has been welcomed by leaders.

Leaders from Africa, South America, Caribbean and Asia have also welcomed Beijing’s “soft” loan because it is different to “Western” loans that come with hectic conditions, sometimes takes months to disapprove.

But when Spielberg resigned, he alleged that China’s aid, investment and sales of weapons to Darfur has increased the blood shed.

Lets get it correct. China’s aid to Sudan is genuine, like any aid to developing countries. Investments in Darfur help build local economy, technological and know-how transfer, all on “win-win” situation. Sales of weapon, if any are done by rules. It is similar to what America does to Taiwan.

It should be looked at this angle. It is the Sudanese government that bears the blame for its ongoing crises. But we can not leave the innocent people suffer. So the international community and other responsible governments should be doing more, instead of asking China alone to play more roles.

The Brookings Institution, a nonprofit public policy organization based in Washington which conduct high-quality, independent research recommends to the Chinese government that Beijing should involve more in solving the Darfur crises.

Brookings recommends that as a member of U.N. Security Council, China should heavily involve in solving the problem through its Foreign Ministry and importantly reduce its oil purchasing from Sudan, and be part of the Security Council to decide upon sanctions.

“Were China to use even a small part of its leverage to call Sudan to account, it would go a long way toward saving lives in Sudan,” according to Brookings.

China is Sudan’s largest trading partner and the main foreign investor in Sudan’s oil industry.

China National Petroleum Corp. has a 40 percent share in the international consortium extracting oil in Sudan, and it is building refineries and pipelines, enabling Sudan to benefit from oil export revenue since 1999.

If there is any economic development and enhancement of people’s lives then it is the investment by Chinese companies and that is what China is willing to help. But the pressure by international communities asking China to pressure Darfur is not inline with China’s diplomatic approach because Beijing is loyal to its “non-interference” policy.

Records have shown that more than 300,000 people have died in the Darfur region of Sudan from starvation, disease and violence during the past two years.

How many more deaths will be tolerated before the international community will act?

Despite criticisms, China has moved in to help minimise the crises. But it can not solve it completely because it’s the leadership in Sudan that can do that. And the international community must also help.

Spielberg and Brookings blaming China remains as allegation because records have shown that the crisis was caused by the western powers before China went in.

Darfur situation is importance to the Pacific Island in many aspects because China is one of the major aid donor and investor in most of the regional economies. Beijing’s investments have been welcomed by the regional governments.

Beijing invests in mining, logging, fisheries and others. It also gives aid and loan. Human resources development is another important area that China is investing.

Western scholars have speculated and connected the 2006 crises in Solomon Islands to China and Taiwan rivalry. They alleged that China and Taiwan interfered in the island’s government and that put Honiara’s China Town in flame.

These scholars speculate that China’s presence in the region will cause instability, like what is happening in Sudan and warned that Australia and U.S. should interfere to save the Pacific Islands.

But the largest Island state, PNG and its Melanesian neigbbours have told Canberra that “look north” policy is an opportunity available. Frank Bainimarama blantly told Canberra and Wellington when they imposed sanction on his military regime that China is a “friend”.

This depicts that regional governments are confident and able to work along with China as a developmental partner, rather then resisting it.

Sir Michale and Bainimara have rightly seen that China has a lot to offer and their policy towards Beijing is improving. And if their stand and policy towards China is conducted honestly, by following international norms and values with the local laws then ones sovereignty will be recognised and upheld.

Scholars assumption that what happened in Darfur will happen in any other countries as long as China is involed is mere speculation and unfounded because China’s investment in Asian countries have resulted in huge economic boom.

Darfur issues are not China’s problem, instead, it is Darfur’s own problem and itself knows the solution. China is only assisting to stop this humanatarian crisis.

Spielberg’s resignation was unfortunate for his professional career. It has nothing to do with the upcoming Beijing Olympic in August. He should not put “politics and sports” together.

The 1.3 billion people of China and the athletics throughout the world are looking forward to the Olympics.

U.S. President George Bush condemned the resignation and assured Beijing that he will personally attend the Game. British Prime Minister Brown termed the resignation “unfortunate” and said politics and sports should be separated. Australia’s Kevin Rudd also condemned the act.

The world leaders have recognized the role China has played and will play not only in the Darfur issue but any issues that will affect humanity. They have recognized that Olympic is the venue to bring people from the North and South together to solve problems such as Darfur and others, through the Olympic Spirit.

Spielberg’s resignation will not affect the opening and closing Olympic ceremony, but instead has given more courage to Beijing to prepare well.

When it comes to Darfur issue, it’s not the problem that concerns China only. It is the problem that every government should play its part in solving, either through the United Nations or any other forums like the African Union.

Blaming China for Darfur crises is a “Cold War” mentality.

China has a lot to offer and the Western countries should not play their Cold-War mentality, attempting to contain China in its gesture to offer more to developing countries.

Pacific Island countries also have a role to play in solving the Darfur issue through the international forums. Imposing sanctions on Darfur is not the way forward, but dialogue leads to mutual understanding and lasting resolutions. That’s Beijing’s approach.

Scholar’s speculation that China’s involvement in the Pacific may cause any problem is an academic hypothesis that has no place in the “coconut and bamboo diplomacy”.

The “bamboo diplomacy” in Asia, with China’s genuine role has proven to be working very well, with the current evidence of robust economic growth.

Pacific island countries should independently assess the role and growth of China, instead of depending on foreign critiques that have a biased intention.

If Darfur crises is used as a spring board to speculate any possible crises then we must understand that the African country has its own history and ideology.

One thing for sure is that China is willing to help genuinely in any areas and the Pacific Island governments should work with Beijing.

If there is any thing that needs to be learnt from Darfur crises then it is the human atrocities.

That’s definitely not China’s doing as Spielberg thinks.

Note: “Asia-Pacific Perspective: China +” looks at Chinese society, culture, economy, governance and China’s role within the Asia Pacific region and the world over. It mainly focuses on how PNG can learn from China’s experience.

Honiara should follow Waigani and Suva

By Mathew Yakai in Changchun, China

SOLOMON Islands must not support the Taiwanese authorities for their proposed referendum for United Nations membership, instead must follow Papua New Guinea and Fiji in supporting the One China Policy.

In order to do this, Honiara must first switch allegiance to Beijing, and deal with Taiwan as an integral part of Great China.

Taipei Times reported that Southeastern African country of Malawi ended its 42-year diplomatic relations with Taiwan and switched its allegiance to Beijing last December, possibly the latest country.

Taipei berated Malawi for announcing its decision, which got Taipei by surprise while Minister Jamaes Huang and defeated President Chen Shui-bian were on a visit to Central America, for the usual “diplomatic witch hunting.”.

Taipei called the untimely break-up the “greatest insult” to the people of Taiwan.. For Malawi, it is for the best of its people.

The move left Taiwan with only 23 allies. In the Pacific are Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands, Palau, Nauru, Kiribati and Tuvalu.

Radio Australia online reports that Palau has switched allegiance to Beijing but there is no official confirmation from Beijing as yet. And Marshall Islands is likely to follow suit. This now leave Solomons, Nauru, Kiribati and Tuvalu.

Solomons Prime Minister Dr. Derek Sikua must now consider Honiara’s stand, basically on the moral and legal bases.

I have mentioned in my last commentary and state again that Honiara should not even support Taiwan in any attempt to increase its so called “international space”, because any support from now on will disturb the people of China and also increase the existing tension between Taiwan and Beijing.

Countries are slowly but steadily switching allegiance to Beijing which reveals that it is the proper way about.

Documents reveal that Pacific is one of the most fiercely fought battle grounds between China and Taiwan for international recognition ever since the 1970s.

But the loss of Chen Chui-bian and the victory of pro-China party, Kuomintang, is unlikely to change the Taiwan’s policy of seeking diplomatic influence among small island states in the Pacific.

If we look at the broader picture, the number of countries that recognize Taiwan in the last two decades has reduced. These states scattered mostly in Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean and the Southwest Pacific.

As has been observed, they have only one thing in common: they are all either extremely small geographically, or economically impoverished. Most are actually both.

But when it comes to collecting numbers, these developing countries remain as important as any others. That’s why Honiara makes a lot of impact in China and U.N when supporting Taiwan. But does it worth?

Many have claimed that China has a stronger diplomatic presence in the South Pacific then any other country’s, which means that China has more diplomats, although not more diplomatic missions in the region.

There is also strong evidence to suggest that the so called “look north (or east)” strategy of the Pacific island states, especially Fiji and PNG is not only underwritten by trade and investment opportunities that China provides, but also by the appeal of the success of China’s economic development model.

Honiara has established diplomatic relations with Taiwan and made her position that she will support any move by Taipei towards independence or U.N membership as in the recent case.
However, the international community is well aware that Taiwan is an integral part of China and that remains to date.

PNG’s Prime Minister, Sir Michael Somare, Fiji’s Bainimarama, Canberra, New Zealand and other Pacific Island countries who uphold the One China Policy are adamant as well.

“Taiwan is a province of China and PNG will not have official contact of any kind with Taiwan,” Sir Michael reiterated at a meeting with Liu Yunshan, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC).

In the APEC meeting in Sydney, Sir Michael met China’s president Hu Jintao and assured Port Moresby’s loyalty. Other regional countries did likewise.

Latest political developments in both Solomons and Taipei should be an opportunity for Dr. Sikua to make a move, that will be his legacy once he leaves politics.

Former Solomons Prime Minister Manase Sogovare and former Taiwan’s President Chen Shui-bian have lost their post.

Chen calls Sogovare “brother” and it can be true biologically given the recent anthropoligical announcement that the Taiwanese have biological linkages with Pacific Islanders.

But politics is politics. Dr. Sikua can not compromise his country’s sovereignity with Taipei which is not a country by international standard.

On the diplomatic level, Dr. Sikua is the new man who must fix and properly set out Honiara’s foreign relations in the region. With Canberra it was perfectly and timely done. The next is either Taiwan or China. I would bet for China because it is legally warranted.

Dr. Sikua should not attempt to follow Sir Michael and Bainimarama’s footstep to show Canberra that he has other options, apart from Canberra to avoid the continuous Canberra “ big boy bullying ”. For Honiara, it must be for the benefit of the country given China’s rapid economic growth at an alarming rate of ten percent this year.

Kevin Rudd will even appreciate if Honiara shift recognition to Beijing. If he does not then it is not because he wants to help Honiara but to keep China away from the region where he has strategic interest. And that will be neocolonialism in the twenty first century.

Big brothers, Canberra and Wellington recognize the One China Policy too because it is inline with the international norms and values. As does by the big Melanesian brothers-Fiji and PNG.

All the Pacific neighbors have healthy bilateral and economic relationship with Beijing. Even trade and investments have been healthy. Most are on win-win situation.

Indian’s Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh was in China this week to strengthen his country’s bilateral relationship with Beijing. His first trip since taking office in 2004 is important because China and India are both growing fast economically and have big markets where they can rely on each other.

The largest living democracy and the largest communist state show to the world that ‘putting people first’ by working closely in any field of mutual benefit is of importance.

Despite their violatile border issue and possible arms race, their meeting is of benefit not only to their people but the region and the world as a whole as far as peace is concerned.

U.S. Navy Adm Timothy Keating, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command was also in China and reiterated that U.S supports the One China Policy but wants the Taiwan issue to be settled peacefully.

Adm Keating asked Beijing to stop building its arms, which is aimed at Taiwan but Beijing insisted that it has no intention to attack any countries.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said early last week that China will reform itself and keep opening up to the outside world.

“China will firmly insist on its reform and opening up, and is ready to develop trade, economic and technological cooperation with other countries in a fair and open environment,” said Wen.

Honiara is left out in “cold” at the waterback of the Pacific Ocean because it must actively participate in some of these regional activities going on, particularly with China.

Dr. Sikua has the prerogative to decide for his country’s foreign policy destination but considering the international and regional trend, the diplomatic ties with Beijing is proper.

It has been evident in the recent past that both Beijing and Taipei attempted to lure Pacific Island countries and other developing countries with money in the form of aid into their respective camps, when coming to address the Taiwan issue.

Both Beijing and Taipei have funded many projects in the Pacific. The Forum Secretariat in Fiji has received substantial donor to carry out identified projects for the collective benefits of the member countries.

Both may play what commentators say “money diplomacy”. But Honiara’s reputation on the international scene is of paramount and that is by recognizing One China Policy.

If any aid or support given by either Taipei or Beijing, one should not term it as “bribery” because Honiara, as a country has all the rights to deal with any country without any intereference fron anyone.

Taiwan is still working closely with countries that do not have bilateral ties with her. That is where Honiara can look at Taipei as an aeconomic and trading partner, but not diplomatically.

Taipei has contributed towards the regional governance in the area of SARS eradication, trade and investments. Taiwan is still helping developing countries in terms of human resources development, IT trainings, collaborative scientific researches, trade and investments.

Pacific Island contries who recognize the One China Policy have worked closely with Taiwan and benefited from its expertise.

In Port Moresby, Taiwan’s Trade Mission office has worked closely with respective bodies in the country and benefits have been tremendious
Honiara must not have any objections to the development of non-governmental economies and cultural ties with Taiwan. Taiwan’s participation in regional bodies like APEC can be of benefit to Honiara as well.

China’s Military spokes women, Jiang Yu reacted to Taiwan’s recent move seeking U.N membership that Chinese government is firmly against any move towards secession and that it is “seeking a close on the situation”.

And again, it is Solomon Islands that is leading the other developing countries in the world pushing for Taiwan’s referendum.

Definitely, Beijing can not punish Honiara for its support towards Taiwan as Honiara is a sovereign state. But the worst Beijing can do is to use its veto power to stop any help towards Honiara if needed. For instance, RAMSI is stressed and an immediate U.N intervention is needed.

Beijing with the conscious mind will think twice given its current interest in Honiara in terms of business and investments. Chinese citizens also do business and they promote person-to-person diplomacy between the two countries.

Beijing also needs Solomons timber and other resources for its growing economy.
Jiang’s point is very clear. “There is only one China. Taiwan is an inseparable part of it. The government of PRC is the only legal administration that represents China.”

Honiara’s recognition of Taiwan as a country considerably disturbs the people of China. This is inevitably worsening the Taiwan Issue, one of the dangerous today.

Taiwan’s attempt is neither urgent nor necessary. The then President Chen Chui-bian was only attempting to leave behind his legacy before he calls a quit.

Indeed, good thinking leaders can push for Taiwanese independence if Beijing bullies Taipei and human right issues are amongst the list of reasons for seeking independence.

But what’s happening is this. Chen Shui-bian came up with his “Taiwan independence” timetable is Sep 2003 on the occasion of the commemoration of the 17th anniversary of Democratic Progressive Party’s founding.

It involved: holding a referendum in tandem with “presidential election” in 2004; formulating a “new constitution” in 2006 and beginning to implement the “new constitution” in 2008, when he is to step down as “president”.

It is critical clear that it is absolutely impossible for Chen to craft a “new constitution” now that his second term expires already. So instead, he came up with a substitution – “the referendum on Taiwan’s UN membership.”

Solomons and other island countries who support Taipei must not be fooled before the international community.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon stressed that Taiwan’s bid to apply for UN membership is legally impossible as per the U.N General Assembly Resolution 2758 which was adopted by the 26th Assembly in 1971.

Late last year, John Negroponte, US deputy secretary of state sent up a warning signal that the United States regards attempts by Taiwan authorities as proactive steps. This is by far the harshest warning by the Bush administration against Taiwan’s attempted “UN membership referendum”.

US criticism has never stopped since the Taiwan authorities started pushing for the “UN referendum”.

For example, during his visit to Taiwan in the middle of June last year, Raymond Burghardt in Taiwan, pressed Chen Shui-bian to reiterate his “four-nots” pledges (not to declare independence, not to change the name of the “Republic of China”, not to push for a two-states idea, not to hold any referendum on “unification” and “independence”).

At a press conference, Burghardt urged the “presidential candidates” from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Kuomintang (KMT) to be cautious in their words and deals and refrain from staging any provocative actions against the mainland.

Hsieh Chang-ting, the DPP’s “presidential candidates”, must have experienced the United States’ anti-referendum mood during his US visit late last year. All the officials he met in Washington DC, whether from the State Department, the National Security Council or the Pentagon, were opposed to the “UN membership referendum.”

Even “pro-Taiwan” US lawmakers shared the White House’s position in this respect. For example, Shelley Berkley, one of the co-chairs of the Taiwan caucus, told Hsiek Changting that it is not the time for Taiwan to join the United Nations.

The US military demonstrates the same attitude when speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Admiral Thimothy Keating, Commander in Chief of the U.S Pacific Commander, touched the opposition to Taiwan’s “UN membership referendum”.

The United Nations is an internbational organization composed of 192 sovereign states. In pushing for the Taiwan to join the U.N under the name of Taiwan, Chen Shui-bian is actually pressing the international community to recognize Taiwan, a “sovereign independence” trick.
Second, he has been trying to leave behind him a “political legacy”.

Chen Shui-bian’s deny as a prominent figure on Taiwan’s political stage has been numbered and he just lost his presidency. Many scholars and researchers think that he is a vanishing personality.

But United States is interestingly having an important place in the Taiwan issue - finds itself in a delicate position.

On the one hand, it is immersed in increasingly complex relationships with the PRC economically, diplomatically and militarily. On the other, it is by law pledged to help defend Taiwan from Chinese oppression and, by its principles, dedicated to supporting democracy and self-determination.

Japan has shown to Beijing that the diplomatic relations and the recognition of One China Policy is of utmost importance when the new Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda visited Beijing late last year, his first official overseas trip since taking office .

When Malawi shift to Beijing, it stated clear that Malawi sees bright futurte with Beijing and can benefit a lot from Beijing’s rapid economic growth.

Honiara now has a task to fulfill, for its citizenry – to maintain bilateral relationship with Taiwan means missing out on opportunities Beijing is ready to offer.

Dr Sikua was recently appointed as the Prime Minister but seem to know diplomacy very well. He has brought back the long stand-off between Canberra and Honiara by delivering Moti.
He will travel to PNG, New Zealand and Australia to strengthen bilateral relationship with his neighbors.

When Dr. Sikua meets his counterparts, he should seek their opinion on whether to switch ties to Beijing.. There is no harm in that.

Dr. Sikua’s Melanesian brother Sir Michael would be honest to advise accordingly. And after the leg of trips, the local media would be interested to see Dr. Sikua’s first overseas trip to its neighbouring Asian countries,

Both Taipei and Beijing are ready to offer red carpet treatment, but Dr. Sikua must look at the longer term.

PNG’s sensational female weight lifter Dika Tou will be in Beijing this month to qualify for the August Beijing Olympic. From Honiara is the National weight-lifting queen Wendy Hale in intense training for the upcoming Oceania Olympic qualifier in New Zealand in March for the Beijing Olympic.

If both make to the Olympic, and that’s what the Pacific Islanders here in China are praying fervently. They will make great impact amongst the locals and international competitors.

This can go even further if Dr Sikua and Sir Michael join hand to say, “lets stick to One China Policy”, for a “win-win” diplomacy. China promotes “win-win” diplomacy in any areas. Sir Michael knows that better.

A meeting for Dr. Sikua and Sir Michael in Port Moresby is timely and God sent to discuss this, even its not on their agenda.

Note: “Asia-Pacific Perspective: China +” looks at Chinese society, culture, economy, governance and China’s role within the Asia Pacific region and the world over. It mainly focuses on how Onceania can learn from China’s experience.

China faces a devastating earthquake

By Mathew Yakai in China

CHINA today faces a natural disaster in the history of mankind.

In its modern history, the people of China, particularly southwest Sichuan Province will not forget Monday 12th earthquake that devastated the entire cities and villages at around 6am.

The 7.9 magnitude terror, which was focused in China’s Sichuan Province, is estimated to have killed more then 22,000 people, and that toll is expected to rise dramatically as rescue teams still searching the rubble of collapse buildings.

About 11,000 homes have been damaged leaving five million people homeless.

In cities near the earthquake’s epicenter, over 26,000 people are buried under the rubble of collapsed buildings. One county has more than 80 percent of buildings been destroyed.

Meanwhile, this column pays tribute to the victims of cyclone Nargis which swept across Burma on May 3rd killing 78,000 people and left large numbers homeless.

BBC reports that the country’s military rulers have allowed some foreign aid in but many expert say the extent of the aid effort is wholly inadequate.

The United Nations condemned the communist regime from stopping foreign aid from going in, while Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon is organizing a meeting of global leaders at which aid for Burma will be top of the agenda.

In China, from super markets to kitchen, lecture rooms to laundry marts, children, the old and ordinary people throughout the country are watching the rescue operators, both foreign and local pulling out the dead and life ones from the collapsed buildings.

Feng Peipei promised days ago that she would celebrate her mother’s 36th birthday which fell on Thursday 15. It is a promise the 14-year-old girl will never be able to keep, People’s Daily reports.

On Thursday morning, Yi Chuanying saw the remains of her daughter being pulled out from a collapsed three-story school in Hongbai town in the city of Shifang.

“You promised we would be together for my birthday today, and for yours next month”, Yi, a divorced migrant worker who flew from Shenzhen in Guangdong province to the disaster site, cried.

“You also promised to give me a belated Mothers’ Day gift. But why did you break your promise, my dear daughter?”

The mountainous town of Hongbai is one of the worst-hit areas in Monday’s quake that struck Sichuan province

Life-detecting devices have found that most of the 700-odd students from the town's primary and middle schools have no chance of survival, rescuers have said."Today, some remains have even started to emit terrible smells.

Hope of survivors is dim," rescue team leader Wen Hongbin told CCTV news, the only English TV station in China.

But some have been lucky and been flown out of the disaster site for relocation.About 50 primary school pupils who were out in the open preparing for physical education lessons at the playground managed to escape.

Five teachers who were waiting for afternoon classes to begin at 2:30 pm were also outside the building, just two minutes before the quake struck, and managed to escape as well.

Few buildings remain standing in the town, which is about 30 km away from Shifang, one of the top-10 richest cities in Sichuan because of its chemical and manufacturing industries.

Unknown numbers of workers and miners in the town are reportedly either stuck under debris or isolated in tunnels, where electricity and communications remain cut off.

A landslide at the entrance of a main road has also blocked off the town from the outside, where the only way in is by foot.Soldiers, medical personnel and volunteers have had to walk on twisted rail tracks to deliver relief supplies.

On a road deep in the mountains of Shifang towards Hongbai, funerals for quake victims are commonplace, while quake victims made homeless meeting with relief workers moving into the area.

Many hope that roads can be repaired by the weekend, even as troops are starting to deliver relief supplies to quake-hit villagers via helicopters."It's difficult to carry out rescue work without heavy machinery, which cannot be moved in," rescue team leader Wen said.

China, is hit hard by natural disaster, especially at the time when the entire country is organizing all its resources and efforts to host the Olympic Game in August with an aim to promote “peace amongst all nations”.

During its Lunar New Year beginning this year, China was also hit hard by the heavy snow, resulting in huge transport hick-up that saw many migrant workers and students missed having celebration with their family members.

The Chinese Communist Government that puts its people first in every situation organized its resources and brought the damaged basic services back to normal.

In this tragedy, about 100,000 police and army have been deployed, international volunteers have flooded in, relieve teams within China and abroad have also flooded in.

Chinese and foreigners throughout China have queued up every where throughout China to donate blood, cash and kinds to the badly damaged province.

Switzerland offered aid for the earthquake victims, Albania donated $US40,000, and New Zealand donated $380,000. according to CCTV.

Individuals and organizations from abroad have donated US$454 billion worth of goods and cash

The United Nations and its agencies have mobilized its expertise and basic relief resources to the devastated areas.

While writing this commentary, cash and kinds are still donated from within and abroad.

At my host Jilin university, (we) the international students organized a fundraising for the devastated victims and collected 11, 567 RMB. The same fundraising activities were conducted in other universities throughout China.

A moving moment was when a six years old girl, a daughter of a lecturer donated 600 RMB and a little toy. (I literally cried when I saw this touching donation).

My Chinese language lecturer donated 4000 RMB, the money she saved for her five years old son who will celebrate his birthday on Tuesday.

From construction workers to restaurant workers, government officials to Communist Party Officials, foreigners to students who are in China have donated what ever they can with all their hearts.

Even the Chinese President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao were physically present at the earthquake site, rescuing and comforting the victims. The true love from the top humble leaders.

They are literally coordinating the relief efforts to make sure the rescued ones are well taken care of and those possibly buried under the debris are safely rescued as soon as possible.

Donations from abroad have also depicted that people have donated from their hearts.

“One World-One Dream”, the slogan for Beijing 2008 Olympic Game in Beijing, that aims at bringing people from all over the world, to meet each other through the spirit of Olympia, that can ultimately bring understanding and world peace.

However, donations flooding from within and abroad towards the relief efforts of the earthquake victims have brought the world together for a common understanding during this time.

When one suffers, despite color, origin, nationality, language differences, they experience the same pain in their hearths, because all are human beings.


The Sichuan earthquake on Monday in China has brought a “Black Monday” for China, and human race, but a day for humanity to share the commonness they have in life.

The forthcoming Beijing Olympic in August this year will go even further to strengthen our human relationship.

It is sad, the 14 years old Feng Peipei will not celebrate her mothers 36th birthday because her mother died in the earthquake.


Yi Chuanying will not celebrate her birthday today with her daughter and for her daughter next month as her daughter is one of the casualties.

Many who managed to survive the devastating earthquake have their own moving stories to tell. They lost their loved ones and their homes.

Sadly, we can not bring back those who have perished under the debris of the buildings, but we can help comfort Yi, Feng and others who are in pain at the moment.

My donation of 500 RMB during the fundraising at Jilin University will eventually make, in a little way, Fi, Feng and others live a normal life. You can do the same. For donations, please seek assistance from the Chinese Embassy in Port Moresby.

For those who have relatives in China can email Liza on liza_gabina@pngembassy.org.cn for more information on their conditions.

I mentioned in my last commentary that I will write on the Olympic Game as of today but given the relevance of this situation, I decided to postpone it to next week.

Note: Asia-Pacific Perspective: China + looks at Chinese society, culture, economy, governance and China’s role within the Asia Pacific region and the world over. It mainly focuses on how Oceania can learn from China’s experience. The writer is a PNG student in China.

Should Honiara switch to One China Policy?

By Mathew Yakai in Changchun, China

SOLOMON Islands must not support the Taiwanese authorities for their proposed referendum for United Nations membership, instead must follow Papua New Guinea and Fiji in supporting the One China Policy.

In order to do this, Honiara must first switch allegiance to Beijing, and deal with Taiwan as an integral part of Great China.

Taipei Times reported that Southeastern African country of Malawi ended its 42-year diplomatic relations with Taiwan and switched its allegiance to Beijing last December, possibly the latest country.

Taipei berated Malawi for announcing its decision, which got Taipei by surprise while Minister Jamaes Huang and defeated President Chen Shui-bian were on a visit to Central America, for the usual “diplomatic witch hunting.”.

Taipei called the untimely break-up the “greatest insult” to the people of Taiwan.. For Malawi, it is for the best of its people.

The move left Taiwan with only 23 allies. In the Pacific are Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands, Palau, Nauru, Kiribati and Tuvalu.

Radio Australia online reports that Palau has switched allegiance to Beijing but there is no official confirmation from Beijing as yet. And Marshall Islands is likely to follow suit. This now leave Solomons, Nauru, Kiribati and Tuvalu.

Solomons Prime Minister Dr. Derek Sikua must now consider Honiara’s stand, basically on the moral and legal bases.

I have mentioned in my last commentary and state again that Honiara should not even support Taiwan in any attempt to increase its so called “international space”, because any support from now on will disturb the people of China and also increase the existing tension between Taiwan and Beijing.

Countries are slowly but steadily switching allegiance to Beijing which reveals that it is the proper way about.

Documents reveal that Pacific is one of the most fiercely fought battle grounds between China and Taiwan for international recognition ever since the 1970s.

But the loss of Chen Chui-bian and the victory of pro-China party, Kuomintang, is unlikely to change the Taiwan’s policy of seeking diplomatic influence among small island states in the Pacific.

If we look at the broader picture, the number of countries that recognize Taiwan in the last two decades has reduced. These states scattered mostly in Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean and the Southwest Pacific.

As has been observed, they have only one thing in common: they are all either extremely small geographically, or economically impoverished. Most are actually both.

But when it comes to collecting numbers, these developing countries remain as important as any others. That’s why Honiara makes a lot of impact in China and U.N when supporting Taiwan. But does it worth?

Many have claimed that China has a stronger diplomatic presence in the South Pacific then any other country’s, which means that China has more diplomats, although not more diplomatic missions in the region.

There is also strong evidence to suggest that the so called “look north (or east)” strategy of the Pacific island states, especially Fiji and PNG is not only underwritten by trade and investment opportunities that China provides, but also by the appeal of the success of China’s economic development model.

Honiara has established diplomatic relations with Taiwan and made her position that she will support any move by Taipei towards independence or U.N membership as in the recent case.
However, the international community is well aware that Taiwan is an integral part of China and that remains to date.

PNG’s Prime Minister, Sir Michael Somare, Fiji’s Bainimarama, Canberra, New Zealand and other Pacific Island countries who uphold the One China Policy are adamant as well.

“Taiwan is a province of China and PNG will not have official contact of any kind with Taiwan,” Sir Michael reiterated at a meeting with Liu Yunshan, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC).

In the APEC meeting in Sydney, Sir Michael met China’s president Hu Jintao and assured Port Moresby’s loyalty. Other regional countries did likewise.

Latest political developments in both Solomons and Taipei should be an opportunity for Dr. Sikua to make a move, that will be his legacy once he leaves politics.

Former Solomons Prime Minister Manase Sogovare and former Taiwan’s President Chen Shui-bian have lost their post.

Chen calls Sogovare “brother” and it can be true biologically given the recent anthropoligical announcement that the Taiwanese have biological linkages with Pacific Islanders.

But politics is politics. Dr. Sikua can not compromise his country’s sovereignity with Taipei which is not a country by international standard.

On the diplomatic level, Dr. Sikua is the new man who must fix and properly set out Honiara’s foreign relations in the region. With Canberra it was perfectly and timely done. The next is either Taiwan or China. I would bet for China because it is legally warranted.

Dr. Sikua should not attempt to follow Sir Michael and Bainimarama’s footstep to show Canberra that he has other options, apart from Canberra to avoid the continuous Canberra “ big boy bullying ”. For Honiara, it must be for the benefit of the country given China’s rapid economic growth at an alarming rate of ten percent this year.

Kevin Rudd will even appreciate if Honiara shift recognition to Beijing. If he does not then it is not because he wants to help Honiara but to keep China away from the region where he has strategic interest. And that will be neocolonialism in the twenty first century.

Big brothers, Canberra and Wellington recognize the One China Policy too because it is inline with the international norms and values. As does by the big Melanesian brothers-Fiji and PNG.

All the Pacific neighbors have healthy bilateral and economic relationship with Beijing. Even trade and investments have been healthy. Most are on win-win situation.

Indian’s Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh was in China this week to strengthen his country’s bilateral relationship with Beijing. His first trip since taking office in 2004 is important because China and India are both growing fast economically and have big markets where they can rely on each other.

The largest living democracy and the largest communist state show to the world that ‘putting people first’ by working closely in any field of mutual benefit is of importance.

Despite their violatile border issue and possible arms race, their meeting is of benefit not only to their people but the region and the world as a whole as far as peace is concerned.

U.S. Navy Adm Timothy Keating, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command was also in China and reiterated that U.S supports the One China Policy but wants the Taiwan issue to be settled peacefully.

Adm Keating asked Beijing to stop building its arms, which is aimed at Taiwan but Beijing insisted that it has no intention to attack any countries.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said early last week that China will reform itself and keep opening up to the outside world.

“China will firmly insist on its reform and opening up, and is ready to develop trade, economic and technological cooperation with other countries in a fair and open environment,” said Wen.
Honiara is left out in “cold” at the waterback of the Pacific Ocean because it must actively participate in some of these regional activities going on, particularly with China.

Dr. Sikua has the prerogative to decide for his country’s foreign policy destination but considering the international and regional trend, the diplomatic ties with Beijing is proper.

It has been evident in the recent past that both Beijing and Taipei attempted to lure Pacific Island countries and other developing countries with money in the form of aid into their respective camps, when coming to address the Taiwan issue.

Both Beijing and Taipei have funded many projects in the Pacific. The Forum Secretariat in Fiji has received substantial donor to carry out identified projects for the collective benefits of the member countries.

Both may play what commentators say “money diplomacy”. But Honiara’s reputation on the international scene is of paramount and that is by recognizing One China Policy.

If any aid or support given by either Taipei or Beijing, one should not term it as “bribery” because Honiara, as a country has all the rights to deal with any country without any intereference fron anyone.

Taiwan is still working closely with countries that do not have bilateral ties with her. That is where Honiara can look at Taipei as an aeconomic and trading partner, but not diplomatically.

Taipei has contributed towards the regional governance in the area of SARS eradication, trade and investments. Taiwan is still helping developing countries in terms of human resources development, IT trainings, collaborative scientific researches, trade and investments.

Pacific Island contries who recognize the One China Policy have worked closely with Taiwan and benefited from its expertise.

In Port Moresby, Taiwan’s Trade Mission office has worked closely with respective bodies in the country and benefits have been tremendious
Honiara must not have any objections to the development of non-governmental economies and cultural ties with Taiwan. Taiwan’s participation in regional bodies like APEC can be of benefit to Honiara as well.

China’s Military spokes women, Jiang Yu reacted to Taiwan’s recent move seeking U.N membership that Chinese government is firmly against any move towards secession and that it is “seeking a close on the situation”.

And again, it is Solomon Islands that is leading the other developing countries in the world pushing for Taiwan’s referendum.

Definitely, Beijing can not punish Honiara for its support towards Taiwan as Honiara is a sovereign state. But the worst Beijing can do is to use its veto power to stop any help towards Honiara if needed. For instance, RAMSI is stressed and an immediate U.N intervention is needed.

Beijing with the conscious mind will think twice given its current interest in Honiara in terms of business and investments. Chinese citizens also do business and they promote person-to-person diplomacy between the two countries.

Beijing also needs Solomons timber and other resources for its growing economy.
Jiang’s point is very clear. “There is only one China. Taiwan is an inseparable part of it. The government of PRC is the only legal administration that represents China.”

Honiara’s recognition of Taiwan as a country considerably disturbs the people of China. This is inevitably worsening the Taiwan Issue, one of the dangerous today.

Taiwan’s attempt is neither urgent nor necessary. The then President Chen Chui-bian was only attempting to leave behind his legacy before he calls a quit.

Indeed, good thinking leaders can push for Taiwanese independence if Beijing bullies Taipei and human right issues are amongst the list of reasons for seeking independence.

But what’s happening is this. Chen Shui-bian came up with his “Taiwan independence” timetable is Sep 2003 on the occasion of the commemoration of the 17th anniversary of Democratic Progressive Party’s founding.

It involved: holding a referendum in tandem with “presidential election” in 2004; formulating a “new constitution” in 2006 and beginning to implement the “new constitution” in 2008, when he is to step down as “president”.

It is critical clear that it is absolutely impossible for Chen to craft a “new constitution” now that his second term expires already. So instead, he came up with a substitution – “the referendum on Taiwan’s UN membership.”

Solomons and other island countries who support Taipei must not be fooled before the international community.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon stressed that Taiwan’s bid to apply for UN membership is legally impossible as per the U.N General Assembly Resolution 2758 which was adopted by the 26th Assembly in 1971.

Late last year, John Negroponte, US deputy secretary of state sent up a warning signal that the United States regards attempts by Taiwan authorities as proactive steps. This is by far the harshest warning by the Bush administration against Taiwan’s attempted “UN membership referendum”.

US criticism has never stopped since the Taiwan authorities started pushing for the “UN referendum”.

For example, during his visit to Taiwan in the middle of June last year, Raymond Burghardt in Taiwan, pressed Chen Shui-bian to reiterate his “four-nots” pledges (not to declare independence, not to change the name of the “Republic of China”, not to push for a two-states idea, not to hold any referendum on “unification” and “independence”).

At a press conference, Burghardt urged the “presidential candidates” from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Kuomintang (KMT) to be cautious in their words and deals and refrain from staging any provocative actions against the mainland.

Hsieh Chang-ting, the DPP’s “presidential candidates”, must have experienced the United States’ anti-referendum mood during his US visit late last year. All the officials he met in Washington DC, whether from the State Department, the National Security Council or the Pentagon, were opposed to the “UN membership referendum.”

Even “pro-Taiwan” US lawmakers shared the White House’s position in this respect. For example, Shelley Berkley, one of the co-chairs of the Taiwan caucus, told Hsiek Changting that it is not the time for Taiwan to join the United Nations.

The US military demonstrates the same attitude when speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Admiral Thimothy Keating, Commander in Chief of the U.S Pacific Commander, touched the opposition to Taiwan’s “UN membership referendum”.

The United Nations is an internbational organization composed of 192 sovereign states. In pushing for the Taiwan to join the U.N under the name of Taiwan, Chen Shui-bian is actually pressing the international community to recognize Taiwan, a “sovereign independence” trick.
Second, he has been trying to leave behind him a “political legacy”.

Chen Shui-bian’s deny as a prominent figure on Taiwan’s political stage has been numbered and he just lost his presidency. Many scholars and researchers think that he is a vanishing personality.

But United States is interestingly having an important place in the Taiwan issue - finds itself in a delicate position.

On the one hand, it is immersed in increasingly complex relationships with the PRC economically, diplomatically and militarily. On the other, it is by law pledged to help defend Taiwan from Chinese oppression and, by its principles, dedicated to supporting democracy and self-determination.

Japan has shown to Beijing that the diplomatic relations and the recognition of One China Policy is of utmost importance when the new Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda visited Beijing late last year, his first official overseas trip since taking office .

When Malawi shift to Beijing, it stated clear that Malawi sees bright futurte with Beijing and can benefit a lot from Beijing’s rapid economic growth.

Honiara now has a task to fulfill, for its citizenry – to maintain bilateral relationship with Taiwan means missing out on opportunities Beijing is ready to offer.

Dr Sikua was recently appointed as the Prime Minister but seem to know diplomacy very well. He has brought back the long stand-off between Canberra and Honiara by delivering Moti.

He will travel to PNG, New Zealand and Australia to strengthen bilateral relationship with his neighbors.

When Dr. Sikua meets his counterparts, he should seek their opinion on whether to switch ties to Beijing.. There is no harm in that.

Dr. Sikua’s Melanesian brother Sir Michael would be honest to advise accordingly. And after the leg of trips, the local media would be interested to see Dr. Sikua’s first overseas trip to its neighbouring Asian countries,

Both Taipei and Beijing are ready to offer red carpet treatment, but Dr. Sikua must look at the longer term.

PNG’s sensational female weight lifter Dika Tou will be in Beijing this month to qualify for the August Beijing Olympic. From Honiara is the National weight-lifting queen Wendy Hale in intense training for the upcoming Oceania Olympic qualifier in New Zealand in March for the Beijing Olympic.

If both make to the Olympic, and that’s what the Pacific Islanders here in China are praying fervently. They will make great impact amongst the locals and international competitors.

This can go even further if Dr Sikua and Sir Michael join hand to say, “lets stick to One China Policy”, for a “win-win” diplomacy. China promotes “win-win” diplomacy in any areas. Sir Michael knows that better.

A meeting for Dr. Sikua and Sir Michael in Port Moresby is timely and God sent to discuss this, even its not on their agenda.

Note: “Asia-Pacific Perspective: China +” looks at Chinese society, culture, economy, governance and China’s role within the Asia Pacific region and the world over. It mainly focuses on how OCEANIA can learn from China’s experience. The writer is from PNG studying in China.