Letters to the Editor      April 21, 1997
   The New York Times

To the Editor:

   I was dismayed by your editorial on the Taiwan Factor (April
14) which seriously misrepresented the established facts of the
Democratic Party campaign scandals, unfairly smeared innocent
Taiwanese Americans, and grossly misinterpreted the origins of
the tensions between China and the United States. You erred on
at least four counts. More appropriately, the culprit is China,
not Taiwan.

   First, the Democratic Party fund-raising trio, John Huang,
Johnny Chung and Charlie Trie, are NOT Taiwanese. They were all
born in China and will proudly tell you they are CHINESE. Your
editorial seems incapable of making this crucial distinction. Big
deal? Of course, because they were working for Chinese, not
Taiwanese, interests. The TIMES is barking up the wrong tree.
Aldrich Ames was not an American spy. He worked for the Soviets.

   Any evidence the trio were not working for Taiwan? Absolutely!
Thanks to The TIMES's own extensive reports on all three. John
Huang's ties to the China-connected Lippo Group and the Chinese
Embassy are now common knowledge. Johnny Chung's prodding with the
Clintons, the White House, and the DNC on behalf of Beijing's
officials were well known. Charlie Trie's notorious intervention
with Bill Clinton on behalf of the Chinese weapons mogul Wang Chun
and his infamous letter to friend "Bill" against helping Taiwan in
the face of Chinese missile terror last year are a matter of public
record. Now we are told he received large sums of money from the
Bank of China, an official Chinese institution. Need any more
evidence?

   Second, The TIMES has done further injustice to the Taiwanese
Americans by singling them out when in fact none of them played
any role in the White House fund-raising abuses. The TIMES erred
in its attempt to smear Taiwan. Its scapegoating of Taiwanese-
Americans is all the more transparent by its failure to fault the
involvement of non-Taiwanese-Americans, especially the alleged
mischief of other Americans such as John Middleton, James Wood,
and their like. The names Middleton and Wood do not quite sound
Taiwanese!

   Third, The TIMES is mistaken in attributing the high tensions
between the United States and China to Taiwan's manipulation,
especially President Lee's visit. Again, it is China, not Taiwan,
which is guilty of escalating the tensions because China pretended
to be misled and offended by the Clinton Administration which gave
them the wrong impression that China could bully the United States
into accepting its claim on Taiwan as U.S. policy.

   To begin with, no official U. S. document establishing diplomatic
relations with China ever committed the United States to denying
any friendly Taiwanese leaders from visiting America. As a matter
of fact, such visits during the Reagan years used to be a common
occurrence. But China over the years has attempted to bully America
by imposing its views on the American administrations and to bar
Taiwanese leaders from visiting the United States. It is China, not
Taiwan, that is guilty of changing the rules of the game.  The
United States as a free and independent nation should not have to
take orders from China in deciding who can or can not visit our
country.

   Additionally, China is guilty of imposing its distorted interpre-
tation of "One China" on the United States. Its insistence on an
anachronistic view of a "One China" empire is the source of tensions
between China and the United States. American outcry against Chinese
missiles intimidating Taiwan was a noble demonstration of a high
principle, not a result of Taiwanese mischief.

   Fourth, America has never ever had a "One China" policy, period.
What we do have is one that "acknowledges (not recognizes or agrees)
that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there
is but one China and that Taiwan is part of China." (1972 Shanghai
Communique). Note the crucial words here: "acknowledges" and "all
Chinese on either side." America was indeed careful enough in 1972
not to agree with the Communist Chinese propaganda about the emot-
ional "One China" notion because both Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek
claimed that theirs was the true and only China. It purposely left
room for future manoeuver should any one side of the Taiwan Strait
change its mind about the "One China" nonsense. Indeed, this is
exactly what has developed: Taiwan no longer maintains "there is
but one China."

   Today's Taiwan is a democracy and is drastically different from
the Taiwan of 1972. America should be proud of its vital contribu-
tions to Taiwan's democratization. Martial law has been abolished.
People no longer get sentenced to death or life for supporting
Taiwan independence. In fact, Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party
and the Taiwan Independence Party which officially support Taiwan
independence receive more population's support than the ruling
Kuomintang (KMT) party in Taiwan. It was no wonder that Taiwan's
representative should announce his nation's new "interim two-Chinas
policy" during the 1993 APEC conference in Seattle when the Chinese
representative foolishly claimed Taiwan as part of the People's
Republic. It was a logical development for Taiwan to reiterate its
new "divided China" policy earlier this year following Deng Xiao-
ping's death. The "One China" notion is effectively dead, and
America should change its China policy accordingly. It is hypocri-
tical for the United States to encourage Taiwan's democratization
without accepting the democratic outcome which is Taiwan indepen-
dence. Instead of accusing Taiwan of abusing America's support, the
TIMES should have hailed Taiwan's remarkable democratic achievements.

                          Sincerely,
                          David W. Tsai, Ph.D.
                          President
                          Center for Taiwan International Relations