Chen Shui-bian, Wang Dan and the Overseas Chinese Democracy Movement
Wang Xizhe's Challenge (11/7/2006) (Chinese News Net)
A joint statement from the Chinese overseas democracy movement concerning Chen Shui-bian's US$200,000 given to the overseas Chinese democratic movement:
1. Most of the overseas Chinese democratic activists oppose Taiwan independence.
2. The overseas Chinese democracy movements accepts the assistance from the Taiwan Nationalist party which accepts that a unified China as policy. This support is just and it is internal to the democratic enterprise in China. We oppose the Democratic Progressive Party's Taiwan independence government using the guise of "supporting the overseas Chinese democracy movement" in order to buy out specific individuals to further its goal to separate China from Taiwan. This is worse when Chen Shui-bian attempts to use "supporting the overseas democracy movement" in order to conceal his own corruption. This insults the overseas democracy movement. We express our strong anger and objection!
3. Chen Shui-bian explained that he took US$200,000 from the state affairs fund and handed it to the "overseas democratic activist" Wang Dan. We insist that Wang Dan explain:
(1) In 2004 and 2006, did you receive US$200,000 from Chen Shui-bian?
(2) How did you use the US$200,000 for the "overseas democratic movement"?
4. Chen Shui-bian said that Wang Dan took US$200,000 in the name of the "overseas democracy movement"? Wang Dan said that he was vexed because he "never asked about where the money came from." This is treating the entire overseas democracy movement as a bunch of idiots. We are not idiots. If Wang Dan is "falsely vexed," then we are truly vexed. We will not permit that the entire "overseas democracy movement" of which we are an integral part of to be used by Wang Dan for a private transaction with Chen Shui-bian. Every person in the "overseas democracy movement" is involved. Wang Dan had better offer an explanation to the entire overseas democracy movement.
5. At the September 23 conference of the National Endowment for Democracy, when Huang Jiacheng asked Wang Dan whether he accepted money from Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party, Wang Dan issued a strong denial. He told the audience that "they can audit my accounts." But at this time, Wang Dan is no longer denying anymore. He is just vexed. Wang Dan's latest defense is that Chen Shui-bian's donations "did not include any political conditions."
Crap! "It did not include any political conditions." This can only be true is you do not object to the basic political positions, policies and assumptions of the donor. If Wang Dan is against the Chen Shui-bian government's Taiwan independence position and policies and yet he says that Chen Shui-bian gave him the money "without any political conditions," then he must be deceiving himself. Wang Dan is just looking the public straight in the eye and lying.
6. Wang Dan said, "If necessary, I will work with the investigative unit in Taiwan to identify the direction of the money flow from Taiwan." Great, but not good enough. Wang Dan has the obligation to address the question of the overseas democratic movement to explain how Chen Shui-bian said that "he gave the fund to support the overseas democracy movement" to you in order to explain where US$200,000 from the state affairs fund went to. The "overseas democracy movement" refuses to be the scapegoat for Chen Shui-bian.
We await the answer from Wang Dan.
Signed: Wang Xizhe and others.
Wang Dan's Explanation (11/11/2006) (Boxun)
1. For the purpose of promoting democratization in mainland China and overseas, we have been soliciting for donations in the USA, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Europe and elsewhere. As a civilian organization, soliciting donations is one of our major tasks. As the chairman of the China Promotion of Constitutional Politics Association, the Beijing Spring publisher, a member of the Chinese Scholars Association, the convenor of the Chinese Youth Human Rights Award selection committee and the leader of other activities, I have an inescapable responsibility.
2. Based upon the current situation in China and the problems that we have encountered in the past, we have established the following principles in accepting donations for the purpose of promoting democracy in mainland China while protecting the safety of our collaborators: no political conditions must be attached; no contributions will be accepted from intelligence departments; no donations shall contravene the local laws; all donations will be used for their intended purposes; all government aid must be declared and reported; and all civilian donations will honor the intent of the donors. These principles were collectively determined: we have always observed these principles, and we have informed our donors about these principles. We are happy to say that no organization or individuals have ever contravened the aforementioned principles to date.
3. The donations that we have received were remitted into the tax-free, non-profit accounts of our organization in accordance with American law, and then used for various activities that are related to the democracy movement and the progress of political activities in mainland China. Last year, we spent money on humanitarian assistance, June 4 memorial activities, study groups, hiring workers, training cadres, exchange of information, operating websites, publishing and other activities.
4. Through the investigation of our records as confirmed by our workers, we did receive the donations as reported from the Taiwan donors by the media. These donations came from various locations at various times to us. Among them, many originated from the United States. We were informed that these donations came from civilians. Our workers explained our principles to the donors repeatedly. Since we were accepting donations from the United States, we were unaware that they originated from the Taiwan state affairs fund. Actually, before the case of the state affairs fund, we did not even know what the state affairs fund was. After the state affairs fund case broke open, we asked our donors about it. To date, the donors have not explained to us where the money came from.
5. Presently, we read from the media where our donations came from. We are sorry about how we got involved in the case. We also express our deep apology for getting our collaborators involved in this case. We will continue to work with the donors to establish the actual circumstances and we are willing to follow the legal process to clarify the truth of the case.
6. In spite of the aforementioned problems, we continue to be grateful to all those who are willing to support the overseas democratic activists and the mainland Chinese democratic activists. The democratization of mainland China affects not only the interests of the mainland Chinese people, but it also means a lot to the stable and peaceful development of Taiwan. We feel strongly about the support from the Taiwan government and the civilian sector to support our activities against the Chinese Communist totalitarian government.
7. As in the past, we will follow our political direction and our policies on donations. We will continue to solicit funds for the democratization of China. At the same time, we will communicate and mediate with others so as to avoid unnecessary problems.
8. The democratization of mainland China affects the security, peace, safety, development and freedom of the entire world. We ask the Chinese people all over the world to support our enterprise through various forms of donations. We ask everybody to publicize our intent and principles for funding and explain our sources of donations. I thank everybody once again.
Wang Xizhe (11/8/2006) (ChineseNewsNet)
The case is simplified as follows:
Previously, Wang Dan said: "I swear that I did not take Chen Shui-bian's money!"
Then Chen Shui-bian said: "Wang Dan took money from me, Chen Shui-bian!"
So Wang Dan declared: "Wang Dan took money from Chen Shui-bian!"
After Wang Dan made his admission, did anyone say "I can't believe this"? Nobody. Absolutely no one. Everybody believed it! They believed it! The only difference is this:
Those who supported Wang Dan said: "I believe Wang Dan took money from Chen Shui-bian!" But he did not take enough. He should have taken more.
Those who opposed Wang Dan said: "I believe that Wang Dan took money from Chen Shui-bian!" But he should not taken it. It was dirty and rotten!"
What about me? I also said, "I believe Wang Dan took money from Chen Shui-bian!"
But should he take it? I did not say. I only want to ask:
1. Wang Dan, if you think Taiwan independence is just and you support Taiwan independence, then you ought to care the money in the open. Why did you do this stealthily? What don't you dare to just take the money?
2. Wang Dan, if you think Taiwan independence is unjust and against the interests of the Chinese people and the principles of the Chinese constitution and if you do not support Taiwan independence, then you should not be taking Chen Shui-bian's money. Otherwise, you are either cheating Chen Shui-bian or the Chinese people. Either one or the other. You cannot say that you have no shame or regrets. You must be having nightmares.