You can't be a superpower if you're this insecure:

Apparently, some Israeli tourists going to travel in China with the latest Lonely Planet book were asked to hand in their very expensive book at the border-crossing due to its 'political nature' showing maps of China which color Taiwan in a different color suggesting that Taiwan is not a part of China.

From fiLi’s world, based on this Israeli message board post. I found it on Asiapundit, which got it from The View from Taiwan. Truly, the Web is a powerful tool.

It's ironic that these two stories should come out on the same day:

Taiwan condemns NKorea missile tests, calls for dialogue with China
07.06.2006

TAIPEI (XFN-ASIA) - Taiwan has condemned North Korea's missile tests saying Pyongyang has threatened stability and peace in the region.

Taiwan to test-fire missile: report
Reuters
Thursday, July 6, 2006

TAIPEI (Reuters) - Taiwan plans to test-fire a missile capable of hitting China, alarming the island's main ally, the United States, a cable news network said on Thursday.

Some might say that to be consistent, I should condemn a Taiwanese missle test just as I did North Korea's. But Taiwan isn't North Korea. It has a farily stable, democratically elected leadership, and it's testing a missile that could defend it against a country — China — that's explicitly threatened to conquer it. North Korea is run by a dictator of questionable judgment, launching missiles towards Japan. The two situations aren't really comparable.

Still, I can't help but think that right now isn't really the best time for Taiwan to be rattling its saber. Not only are its actions undermining its own condemnation of North Korea's test, but at present, they're likely to draw criticism when at a later time they might inspire sympathy.

Mutantfrog emailed me a link to this Taipei Times story about Taiwanese bikers demanding the freedom to ride the country's roads:

More than 1,500 motorcycle owners from across the nation yesterday took to the streets of Taipei on their bikes yesterday, demanding that the government establish a clear timetable for opening more highways for bikers.

The demonstrators rode their motorcycles to Taipei City Hall and the Legislative Yuan, while chanting "Return our road rights" and "Bikers aren't criminals" in front of the two buildings, led by the spokesman for more than 68 motorcycle dealerships across the country, Chen Feng-yun (陳豐運).

The demonstration was the 12th major public event organized by motorcycle dealerships since the country's first motorcycle protest — also led by Chen — in 2003.

Motorcycles with an engine capacity of more than 150cc did not become legal until Taiwan joined the WTO four years ago, but the right to drive them on various highways has been granted grudgingly.

Read the whole thing. It's just another example of bikers getting involved in the political process when their rights are threatened.

Newsweek covered it in January, and now the Los Angeles Times reports on the China-Taiwan gift panda kerfuffle.

Riding Sun, however, has been on top of this developing story since last May, with numerous updates since then (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). Any more panda coverage, and I'd be Ron Burgundy.

FOLLOW-UP:
The LA Times does provide quite a bit of detail about China's history of panda diplomacy, and about pandas themselves. For example:

The species has earned the nickname "living fossils" for having an inefficient reproductive system, with captive males showing little interest in sex, and females in heat only a few days a year. Foreign scientists working with the Chinese have made advances in artificial insemination, while Chinese keepers have taken a different tack: panda "porn" videos to get them in the mood.

Since last summer, China has been trying to give Taiwan a pair of pandas. Supposedly, they're merely a goodwill gift, but China has been hyping them as a "symbol of unity" &$151; or, in other words, of Taiwan's reunification with the mainland and submission to Beijing's rule. It's a story I've blogged about quite a bit (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).

Now, the Yomiuri Shimbun reports, it seems that Taiwan may indeed reject the gift pandas after all:

Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian said during an interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun on Friday that he would reject China's decision to present two pandas to Taiwan if China aims to exploit the gift as part of its strategy to unify Taiwan with the mainland.

Well, is China doing that? Let's see:

In January this year, the Chinese government selected two pandas based on criteria including "health" and "cuteness."

After asking the public to suggest names for the pandas, it decided on Tuan Tuan and Yuan Yuan, a play on the Chinese word "tuanyuan," which means "reunion." The term is also used to describe the occasion when dispersed family members get together.

Not very subtle, is it? But two can play at that game. I recently suggested that one way to get in a little dig at China would be to give pandas names like "Freedom" or "Democracy" — and it seems that some Taiwanese have had the same idea:

"There are those who even say they should be renamed Duli (independence) and Jianguo (nation-building) when they come to Taiwan," said Chen who looked irritated when he was questioned about the pandas.

Heh. I'd love to see China's reaction to that one.

Even though I think Japanese whaling is unjustly villified, I much prefer the Taiwanese version.

Newsweek has a good summary of China's attempt to give a pair of pandas to Taiwan, a story I've blogged about several times previously (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

While in Kyoto today on his tour of Asia, President Bush spoke fairly directly about human rights in China. The Los Angeles Times reports:

"By meeting the legitimate demands of its citizens for freedom and openness, China's leaders can help their country grow into a modern, prosperous, and confident nation," Bush said.

He punctuated his comments by drawing an unusually direct parallel between China and Taiwan, an island democracy claimed by China that the U.S. has pledged to protect.

..."Taiwan is another society that has moved from repression to democracy as it liberalized its economy," Bush said. "This opening to world markets transformed the island into one of the world's most important trading powers. Economic liberalization in Taiwan helped fuel its desire for individual political freedom — because men and women who are allowed to control their own wealth will eventually insist on controlling their own lives and their future."

It's not exactly, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." And the Times reports that China appears to have dismissed the speech as mere political posturing. But it's a start.

Shortly after I blogged about Google's Google Maps service listing Taiwan as a province of China, the company changed course, reports Mutantfrog, removing any mention of Chinese control from Taiwan's map listing.

Here's the old method:


And here's the current version:


It appears that although the latest result comes from the same URL (maps.google.com), Google now calls it "Google Local", not "Google Maps". And rather than listing the name of the location it's displaying (i.e., "Taiwan, Province of China"), the site simply calls up a map of whatever place name you've typed in. The map itself, which isn't fully displayed in the above small photo, simply labels Taiwan as Taiwan.

The Mercury News reported last Tuesday on the thinking behind the change:

The recent Google change is broader than just a fix on the Taiwan map. It's an overall update of the service's "user interface", or what Web users see on-screen when they view any part of Google Maps, Frost said.

The new version fills the screen with a map, eliminating the labeling text that had appeared on the left-hand side. That change removed the controversial label next to Taiwan's map.

The old version "was not often helpful for users, and took up a lot of the screen," said Frost.

By simply labeling the island "Taiwan", Google follows a convention many other geography services have adopted — one that avoids the issue of political control.

Of course, China's unlikely to agree that the new method "avoids the issue of political control", since Google's maps now label Taiwan just like any other country. But, as my dad likes to say, tough noogies.

If anyone can read Chinese, I need some help. The person who blogs at 女詩人出（部落）閣 tracked back to my post on Google Maps labelling Taiwan as a province of China and wrote the following:

在國際重要媒體、網站報導之後，台灣正名緊接著受到全球部落格圈討論。

不管對內政是否有意見、也不論你對不同階段的執政者（黨）是否不滿意；每個台灣人都應該有自信「台灣是個主權獨立的國家」，每個台灣人都應該敢於在國際注目下，大聲說出「台灣不是中國的一省」。

就算你不排除「歸化到中國之下」的選項，也要堂堂正正地保住獨立的國格，才有籌碼去與對手談判吧。

不管你心中對台灣的未來懷著多少選項，都請支持向國際大聲說出現狀的事實：台灣不是中國的一省！！

For all I know, it says I'm a big idiot, although the same post also tracked back to several other blogs' posts about the same news story.

FOLLOW-UP:
Thanks to the extreme coolness of the Internet, just hours after I posted this, I got an answer — from the actual blogger who wrote the Chinese post. She writes:

sorry didn't notice you in advance.

my blog name [女詩人出（部落）閣] means a poet(ess)'s blog.

i was collecting these (searching result from Google blog search engine) to show my blog visitors that this issue is mentioned not only by media/news sites but also by blogs. (not saying your bad words ^_^)

the chinese paragraphs you quote above is saying:

everone in taiwan is supposed to be confident to tell the world the fact that "taiwan is not a province of china".

well, thank you for your attention to taiwan. we appreciate you understanding a militarily weak country.

Thanks, Poetess.

Also, I've added a follow-up to my original post about Google's Taiwan map.

I've blogged before about Western companies' shameless attempts to ingratiate themselves with China's vicious, repressive, amoral, puppy-beating regime. Now, via Dartblog, comes another example: Google's Google Maps service lists Taiwan as a "Province of China". Here's a screen shot:


The Taipei Times reports that Taiwanese,in particular the members of the staunchly pro-independence Taiwan Solidarity Union, are not amused:

The Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) legislative caucus yesterday called on the public to write to Google to protest its listing of Taiwan as a "province of China" on its Google Maps service.

In addition to sending its own letter of protest to the US search-engine giant, the caucus asked the government to lodge a formal protest and request Google to clearly define Taiwan as "an independent state."

TSU caucus whip David Huang said that Google Maps' definition of Taiwan as part of China was not only far-fetched but also unacceptable to the nation's people.

"Taiwan is an independent, sovereign state. Taiwan is not part of China," Huang said.

You can let Google know how you feel about its "One China" policy here.
 
FOLLOW-UP:
Simon World links to China-focused blogs here and here that echo and amplify what commenters RFTR and Dave Justus have noted: Google is just following America's own policy toward the official status of Taiwan, as well as international naming conventions. I knew that America's official policy is to acknowledge that Taiwan is a part of China — but it's also our policy to defend Taiwan militarily against any Chinese attempt at forced reunification, which says a lot about where our sympathies truly lie.

I guess I was hoping that Google, a company whose motto is "Don't be evil", might similarly aim a little higher than simply falling back on the "We're just following general standards" argument. It appears that hope was naïve.

Via Crooks and Liars, the Guardian reports:

A senior Chinese general has warned that his country could destroy hundreds of American cities with nuclear weapons if the two nations clashed over Taiwan.

Major general Zhu Chenghu, a dean at the National Defence University, said he was expressing a private opinion, but his comments, the most inflammatory by a senior government official in 10 years, will fuel growing concerns in Washington about the rise of China.

...Echoing threats last made in 1995, Mr Zhu, who has a reputation as a hawk in Chinese military circles, said his country was ready to sustain heavy casualties in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and other heavily populated areas.

"We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian," he said. "Of course, the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese."

Although Mr Zhu said war was unlikely, his proposal that China should adopt a first-strike nuclear option against the US will alarm the Pentagon.

Well, I should hope it would.

FOLLOW-UP:
Via ChinaDaily, Beijing has emphasized that General Zhu was expressing his "personal views". I suspect China's leadership rather likes having someone like Zhu running around making wild threats, while it remains comparatively calm. Kind of a geopolitical good cop-bad cop routine.

ANOTHER FOLLOW-UP:
Simon World rounds up reactions to Zhu's remarks. Check here, here, here, and here.

Previously, I blogged about China's attempt to give Taiwan a pair of giant pandas, ostensibly to foster "cross-Straits affinity". Of course, it's difficult to drum up much affinity in a nation you are simultaneously threatening with military action, and Taiwan rejected the gift (although it later seemed to soften its position).

The gift pandas were not China's only goodwill overture. It also proposed opening its market further to fruits grown in Taiwan, like mangoes. However, a recent story from Taiwan's Central News Agency suggests that this gesture is getting an equally cold shoulder:

Last year, Tainan County exported 501 tons of mangoes, worth US$2 million, to Japan. Following the inauguration of two heat/steam fruit-disinfecting facilities in the Chuochen and Yuching townships in early July, exports are expected to grow to 1,500 tons this year, totalling US$10 million, according to the county government.

Asked about China's offer to open its market wider to Taiwan fruits, Su said China is only one export outlet for Taiwan fruits. He added that although China has offered tariff-free treatment for many Taiwan fruits, it is not a good market for high-priced agricultural products. He suggested Taiwan work to make inroads into markets where consumers have more spending power and are more receptive to higher value fruits.

Translation: "Aww... that's so cute that you want to buy our produce, but we'd rather sell it in countries where the people aren't so poor." Ouch.

Last month, I blogged about China's attempts to give Taiwan a pair of giant pandas "as a symbol of peace, unity and friendship." Of course, China's idea of "unity" requires Taiwan to place itself under Beijing's rule, and so the gift was refused. As the Telegraph reported:

Taiwanese officials have said the gift of two giant pandas offered by China as part of a diplomatic charm offensive will be refused. Taiwan fears acceptance would be seen as acknowledging Beijing's claim that Taiwan is part of China.

But China didn't give up. On June 1, China Daily reported that Chinese officials were still urging Taiwan to accept the pandas:

Beijing yesterday renewed its charm offensive towards Taiwan, urging immediate non-government talks across the Straits to pave the way for goodwill gifts to reach the island.

The gifts include scrapping import tariffs on dozens of Taiwan-grown fruits and giving the island a pair of giant pandas as a symbol of peace, unity and friendship.

...Six mainland officials from related government departments elaborated on Beijing's preparations for delivering the gifts yesterday at a regular press conference held by the Taiwan Affairs Office.

So, Beijing started making preparations for delivering a gift that Taiwan refused to accept. And instead of clearly reaffirming its earlier rejection, Taiwan's government went wobbly. As the Taipei Times reported the very next day:

Before China can fulfill its promise to deliver two giant pandas to Taiwan, officials from Beijing and Taipei will have to sit down and discuss the practical implications, such as whether the animals will be able to survive in Taiwan, the Cabinet said yesterday.

With Taiwan sliding from an outright refusal to a discussion of details and practicalities, China began whipping up popular support. It's giving plenty of media coverage to the selection of the two pandas, and holding a contest to name them.

Sadly, Taiwan seems to have finally buckled under the weight of China's panda hoopla. As Taiwan's Central News Agency reported on Saturday:

MAC [Mainland Affairs Council] officials said the government will be glad to see the pandas come to Taiwan if the procedures are in accordance with related international and domestic laws and there is somewhere in the country that is capable of taking care of the animals. The officials stressed that the government is considering the issue purely from the conservation point of view and not from any other angles.

When Taiwan first rejected the pandas on the grounds that the gift would violate international agreements on trade in endagered species, I thought it was just putting a diplomatic spin on its decision. But now it sounds like it's actually preparing to accept the pandas, once all the legal kinks and practical matters are addressed.

I think this is a mistake. Given the degree to which China is spinning the pandas as a symbol of cross-Straits "unity" (i.e., Taiwanese subjugation), Taiwan should have simply said no.

If Taiwan hopes to enjoy undisputed independence someday, it cannot afford to foster a sense of ambiguity about its national sovereignty. Like pandas themselves, it should be a matter of black and white.

I'm starting to think it would be possible to create a successful blog out of nothing more than comments on the funny-because-they're- being-serious articles in China's state-controlled media.

In this recent gem from Xinhua, we learn that China expects Taiwan to forget that whole silly independence thing now that China's offered to import more Taiwan-grown fruits, let Chinese citizens travel to Taiwan, and — this is the biggie, folks — give Taiwan its very own pair of pandas:

Chen Yunlin, director of the Taiwan Work Office of Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, announced here Tuesday morning that the mainland compatriots have decided to present a pair of giant pandas, known as national gem, to Taiwan compatriots as a symbol of peace, unity and friendship.

..."For many years, the mainland compatriots have had the wish to present giant pandas to Taiwan compatriots, and many Taiwan compatriots have repeatedly expressed their expectations to see cuddly pandas in Taiwan too," Chen said in Shanghai, the last stop of the KMT delegation's mainland tour from where the group will fly back to Taipei Tuesday afternoon.

Chen said the Taiwan compatriots' desire for giant pandas to settle down on the island has become ever stronger now that Lien's mainland tour and an upcoming visit by People First Party (PFP) leader James Soong have helped deepen the affection and affinity between Chinese compatriots on the two sides of the Straits.

"We hope the pandas, with their tame nature, air of nobleness and cuddly looks will bring joy and laughter to the Taiwan compatriots, children in particular," he said.

China's supposed goodwill gesture gives off a tawdry, late-night-infomercial vibe: How much would you pay to be governed by a dictatorial regime known for its human rights abuses and repression of free speech and religion? Wait! Don't answer yet! Because we're also throwing in... a pair of giant pandas! Now how much would you pay?

I'm reminded of Humphrey Bogart's line in Casablanca: "I don't mind a parasite. I object to a cut-rate one."

It strikes me that pandas are a poor symbol indeed for China's communist leaders, who are definitely not known for their cuddly looks or tame nature, or for bringing anyone joy and laughter.

The BBC reports on Taiwanese opposition leader Lien Chan's trip to China:

"Peace is no longer pie in the sky," Lien Chan told reporters.

He was speaking in Shanghai, where he was meeting business leaders on the last leg of his controversial visit.

It's controversial because Lien is undermining Taiwan's chance for true independence, as well as the position of its elected leader, President Chen Shui-bian, who is getting the cold shoulder from China:

Despite some ideological differences, the Chinese are closer to Mr Lien's Nationalist Kuomintang Party than they are to Mr Chen's Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

China has so far refused to negotiate with Mr Chen until he signs up to the one-China policy - acknowledging that Taiwan is part of China.

The BBC says Lien's Kuomintang (KMT) party favors eventual reunification of Taiwan and China, "so long as China is by then democratic." But it's not clear why Lien thinks China will become democratic any time soon. Its current proposal is to govern Taiwan under the same sort of "one country, two systems" approach it used to squelch democracy in Hong Kong a year ago. As Radio Free Asia reported in April 2004:

China has ruled out full and direct democratic elections for Hong Kong's legislature in 2008 and for the Chief Executive in 2007, prompting fears that the territory's promises of a "high degree of autonomy" are fast being eroded, RFA's Mandarin and Cantonese services report.

The Standing Committee of China's parliament, the National People's Congress (NPC), issued a ruling saying that universal suffrage wouldn't be used to elect Hong Kong's chief executive in 2007 or the territory's legislature a year later, effectively postponing any consideration of full and direct elections until 2012.

"Universal suffrage is not a free lunch," NPC Standing Committee deputy secretary-general Qiao Xiaoyang told a meeting with Hong Kong legislators when the decision was announced. "It is far more courageous to say, with an eye on Hong Kong's actual situation and long-term interests, that there should not be direct universal elections in 2007 and 2008."

Yet despite the cautionary example of Hong Kong, Lien is all too happy to cozy up to China, appearing to trust its promises of virtual autonomy for Taiwan, even as it threatens the island with a grauitously hostile "anti-secession law". It's difficult to see him as anything but a traitor, a coward, or a fool.