Inside Philippine politics & beyond

PH envoys handed Taiwan government drafts of Manila’s apology & position on shooting incident

Share:
LinkedIn0
Pinterest0

Exclusive

By Raïssa Robles

Taiwan-MecoEven before the Taiwan government had received the official letter containing the Philippine apology for the death of the Taiwanese fisherman, Taipei already knew its contents, highly knowledgeable sources said.

In fact, the Taiwan government already knew the contents of three previous drafts of the letter.

MECO chair & CEO Amadeo Perez, Jr.

This was because top officials of the Manila Economic and Cultural Office (MECO) — our “ambassadors” to Taiwan (we’re not allowed to have embassies and ambassadors because of our One China Policy) — were handing to the Taiwan foreign ministry all four drafts of what the official letter was to contain.

On top of that, Manila’s quasi-envoys to Taiwan – MECO chairman and CEO Amadeo Perez Junior and MECO Taiwan managing director and resident representative Antonio Basilio – were taking Taiwan’s side and trying to convince the Philippine government to support Taiwan’s four demands following the fisherman’s death. These demands were contained in Version 1 of the letter of apology, sources also indicated.

Apparently, after the fisherman’s shooting, the Philippine MECO officials took it upon themselves to go into a huddle with Taiwan officials and formulate the letter of apology the Philippine government was supposed to submit. It isn’t clear if the MECO officials kept Manila informed of what they were doing.

My sources tell me that the MECO officials, who have since been recalled to Manila, are probably going to get fired.

MECO is a plum post. A source connected to a former MECO top official told me that for MECO envoys “there is no accounting of funds”. The officials – who are often not professional diplomats – are only accountable to the Philippine president since MECO is not under the Department of Foreign Affairs. (The current MECO officials are under the Office of the Executive Secretary.) At present, “It is a political reward. It pays very well, if you’re talking of a salary, a car and driver, and a house in a really nice exclusive place in Taipei,” my source said.

The source also said MECO generates revenues in the form of visa fees and it is completely discretionary on the part of the MECO heads to decide how much of these visa fees to turn over to the Philippine government.

Being the head of MECO, “you can do a lot of favors for people, especially those who want to make business back and forth,” the source added.

I stumbled on this latest twist in the Taiwan dispute after @Martial Bonifacio, a commenter on Cyber Plaza Miranda – the growing number of cyber-citizens who congregate on my site – placed a link in one of his comments.

The link led to a downloadable PDF. It contained the four versions of the Philippine apology, all dated May 14, all on MECO letterhead. Three of them were signed by MECO Taipei resident representative Antonio Basilio and printed with the MECO letterhead.

Knowing what was in all four versions gave Taiwan a huge diplomatic and negotiating edge. Also, apparently, it contributed to the Taipei government’s fury. It thought it was going to receive the servile and docile draft no. 3, and instead got draft no. 4 — the version which Manila (not our ambassadors) wrote. The fourth letter version deviated markedly from Taiwan’s initial four demands, which were reflected in Version 1 which was unsigned and was not on MECO letterhead.

It led to Taipei branding the Philippine government “dishonest” and “capricious” and imposing eight sanctions against Manila.

I tried phoning Mr. Basilio yesterday for the South China Morning Post story I was working on. He was in the MECO office in Makati but I was told he was “tied up on the phone” or was “busy.” So I left the following questions for him to answer:

1. There were four different versions of the letter which reached MOFA (Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs) on the same day. Which version was cleared by Malacañang?

2. Why were there four versions?

3. Were the other versions only drafts?

Later in the day (May 21) someone in the MECO office e-mailed me Mr Basilio’s replies.

Mr Basilio’s last sentence stated:

“Releasing these earlier versions is a breach of protocol and courtesy.”

He apparently meant the Taipei foreign ministry should not have made all the drafts public.

MECO representative in Taiwan Antonio Basilio holds a press briefing with Taiwan Foreign Minister David Lin on May 15. Lin’s office later released Basilio’s signed drafts to the public.

He confirmed that the four versions were really drafts. Here’s his explanation why the Taiwan foreign ministry under David Lin had all four versions:

“It does not matter how many versions came out of the meeting on May 14. They are drafts that reflect a sincere effort by me and the Foreign Minister to reach agreement under severe time constraints and the need to secure clearance from our superiors. What matters is the final version that was accepted. That final version responds to the Taiwanese demand for : 1) President’s apology to the family and the people of Taiwan for the loss of life; 2) start of the investigation (which is about to be completed); 3) convening of relevant agencies in the Philippines to consider ways to prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future. Financial assistance was also offered to the family of Mr. Hong. These actions were conveyed to the Taiwanese public via a press conference that followed.”

Mr. Basilio mentioned a meeting that took place on May 14 which resulted in the drafts. He justified the drafts as reflecting  “a sincere effort by me and the Foreign Minister to reach agreement under severe time constraints and the need to secure clearance from our superiors.”

I was stunned. For whom was Mr. Basilio negotiating, I wondered.

The  political affairs officer of the Taiwan Economic and Cultural Office (TECO) shed more light on what had happened during the May 14 meeting. David Chien of TECO held a briefing for Manila reporters last Monday. According to the Philippine Daily Inquirer report of the briefing:

He (Chien) said that on May 14, MECO and TECO reached an agreement on measures to take to avoid an escalation of tensions.

“The agreement included a formal letter expressing the Philippines’ response to the Taiwan government’s requests, to be delivered by Basilio to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Mofa),” Chien said.

“However, when Mr. Basilio arrived in Taiwan on the evening of May 14, he presented a letter to Mofa that was completely different from the one initially agreed upon by MECO and TECO,” he said.

“The Philippines’ Department of Foreign Affairs and other government agencies apparently have insisted on certain wordings for the letter,” he said.

“The final version of the letter was still very different from the first letter agreed upon in the afternoon of May 14,” he said.

“Taiwan felt that this inconsistency shows the insincerity of the Philippine government in meeting the Taiwan government’s demands,” he added.

“We want a formal apology from the Philippine government, an impartial and thorough investigation, appropriate punishment for perpetrators, compensation to the family of the victim from the Philippine government, and the conduct of fishery talks between Taiwan and the Philippines as soon as possible in order to establish fishery orders in overlapping EEZs (exclusive economic zones),” he said.

The Manila Times had a very interesting take on the same briefing in the story entitled “PH official bungles talks with Taiwan”.

The story quotes David Chien as saying that a “secret phone call” from an unnamed Philippine government official “blew up everything” that had already been agreed upon between MECO and TECO officials.

Chien told reporters that the first and third versions of the letter of apology were acceptable to Taiwan. But the fourth version was “unacceptable and beyond imagination”.

I have not been able to find out the identity of this government official whose phone call resulted in scuttling everything. The Manila Times head for the story blames this official for bungling talks with Taiwan.

But did he, really?

Were the talks between MECO officials and the Taiwanese foreign ministry approved in the first place? Or did MECO officials go out on a limb; ascertained the demands of Taiwan; and then pressed the Philippine government to accede to them?

I obtained the answers from putting together the following pieces of information.

Deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte held a press conference on the same day that Chien of TECO did. Valte told reporters it was only the fourth letter that the Philippine government had authorized. Valte said:

“The last letter that was transmitted to them was authorized by the President and I understand the contents of the letter were very precise and that it was emphasized there, it was made very clear that the President had already tasked the National Bureau of Investigation, which, in our view, has already proven their impartiality and their objectivity in investigations that they have been tasked by the President to undertake.”

In other words, it was the fourth letter that reflected the Philippine position. The rest did not.

Who then authorized MECO officials to write the first version of the apology letter which closely reflected Taiwan’s demands? (I am posting at the bottom the four versions of the letter and the Taiwan foreign ministry’s comparison of the four letters. You can download these from MOFA’s website.

And so I asked various government sources around.

A senior diplomat who agreed to talk provided he was not named told me that negotiations can and do take place informally before such letters are sent. However, the drafts are never released, never signed and never printed on official stationery.

One of the sources told me that Version 1 of the letter “was not the agreed response.”

Because of this, the two MECO officials are going to lose their jobs, although “they may not know it yet,” source added.

I wanted to know exactly why Mr Perez and Mr Basilio would lose their posts. This is the answer I got:

“The first rule of proper relations is that officials can be relied on to uphold their principals’ position and not (by) going rogue.”

While I was gathering data for my piece on Taiwan yesterday, I chanced upon an interview of Mr. Perez over radio station DZMM. He was asked whether the shooting incident had happened in Philippine territorial waters – as what Malacanang Palace and the Philippine Coast Guard have repeatedly said.

Mr Perez’ reply on radio did not follow the official line. All he said was: “Let’s wait for the investigation.”

Below are the four versions of the letter and the Taiwan foreign ministry’s comparison of them:

Version 1, page 1  

Version 1, page 2

Version 2

Version 3, page 1

Version 3, page 2

Version 4, page 1

Version 4, page 2

Taiwan foreign ministry’s comparison of the four versions:

Comments

  1. Our Taipei MECO “diplomats” — actually businessmen appointed by the President — in effect revealed ALL our negotiating positions to Taiwan. Not only that, they drafted apologies in consultation with Taipei (and apparently not with Manila) that were very much to Taipei’s liking.

    Taiwan has no UNCLOS rights because it is not a signatory — it is not allowed to be, given that it is a non-country (a state with limited recognition, extended to it by a handful of tiny countries).

    In fact the Cory government very kindly GAVE Taiwan an “access corridor” to the Pacific passing through our waters. Signing an agreement with Taipei will raise all sorts of diplomatic complications affecting our One China Policy.

    • PRC (China) and ROC (Taiwan, formerly Formosa) still do assert itself on each other’s turf.

      PRC says ROC (Taiwan) is it’s province and has sovereignty over that ‘state’. Whereas ROC says it claims sovereignty over all of China (Mainland).

      For Economic and Cultural reasons, the Phils., as a Policy, recognize both as One-China.

      Both Chinese groups envies the Phils.’ rich maritime fishing areas. ROC intrudes and gets shot at, whereas the PRC, intrudes wantonly and gets watched at.

      One-China are ‘running on empty’ to feed their own people. Both wouldn’t prefer to pay for catches, nor couldn’t wait for alms, as in times past. They just have to encroach on the Phils.’ natural resources by force and intimidation (bullies).

      —

      Alan, i have several comments under moderation. Busy si RR?

      • It’s a mysterious, mystifying problem we have with the comments system — it randomly puts various comments under moderation. I’ve had the same experience

        • That’s good to know.

          Its raining here and brrrhhh cold. cooked tinola last night. the family loved it.

          maybe ur hubby can cook some soup 4 u 2.

          —
          kaliwa’t kanan ang problema ng ‘pinas.

          all da best sa inyong lahat.

        • Oii wow, mabuti kung ganuon.

          sa kapampangan, ang tawag diyan ng mga nakakatanda – lelot.

          maniaman iya wari? (macharap ba?)

          lol!

          good on yah!

  2. “(Taiwan) President promises regular coastguard patrols to protect fishermen”
    http://focustaiwan.tw/news/aipl/201305220034.aspx
    The Philippines, meanwhile, has sent a presidential envoy to Taiwan to offer an apology, is mulling compensation of NT$1 million (US$33,464) to Hung’s family, and has expressed interest in talks on a fishery deal.

    Is there a 5th draft ?

    • Straight from the Horse’s Mouth:

      “(Taiwan) President welcomes Philippines’ interest in fishery talks”
      http://focustaiwan.tw/news/aipl/201305220018.aspx
      Such an agreement will also make it easier to deal with trespassing, he said.
      “Trespassing is unavoidable even with a clear delineation. But by that time, there will be a basis for handling such incidents,” Ma said.

      I’m beginning to feel we’re being scammed.

    • I’m beginning to see the picture now, as clear as mud.

      Read this article to find out:
      http://focustaiwan.tw/news/afav/201305210044.aspx

      Apparently, Taipei dictated to Mr. Basilio their demands which included all 4 conditions (apology, investigation, compensation & fishing agreement) they were asking for.

      Mr. Basilio quickly drafted the letter on MECO’s letterhead, signed it and sent it to TW Foreign Ministry to avoid a deadline set by Taipei, except that, it wasn’t a draft but a quick fix to escape any sanctions. (because of the deadline)

      Mr. Basilio later on retracted and said that the letter sent was only a draft. (Probably, after getting a bashing from PNoy) so they come up with 2 more drafts and last of which was rejected. (citing insincerity)

      Sounds like coercion to me. Taipei played its hand like a seasoned poker professional, while Mr. Basilio laid out all his cards.

      This is not the kind of back channelling that a friendly neighbor would open to ease tension. It’s downright intimidation and coercion to our primary channel of negotiation, played all the way to the top.

      You have the TW President breaking diplomatic protocol by calling us cold-blooded murderers, inciting its citizens to retaliate on PH expats. You have the TW Foreign Ministry coercing our envoy to give in to their demands and when our president did not obliged, they tell you you’re insincere. Most probably, the joint investigation will be whitewashed too then we need to give in more leeway to their fishing expeditions.

      Sorry, Mr. Hung, may you RIP. But you have just become just another collateral damage to your President’s political exercise.

      And rest assured, the future of your country under this president is as clear as mud.

      • And 1 more thing, the TW Government leaked the 4 drafts because their people are asking why the president rejected PH’s apology. In reality, TW rejected because their demands weren’t met. Plain and simple.

  3. 1 Draft, 3 Official

    Completely different

    “However, when Mr. Basilio arrived in Taiwan on the evening of May 14, he presented a letter to Mofa that was completely different from the one initially agreed upon by Meco and Teco,” he said.

    The first version, he said, contained the words “Philippine government,” but the second version omitted it.

    On the matter of investigation, the first version and third version mentioned that an investigation by the National Bureau of Investigation would start soon, but the final version mentioned no such investigation, he said.

    On the compensation for the family of Hung, the first and third versions stated financial restitution, but the final version says “donations received from the commiserating Philippine people” and did not mention restitution to the victim’s family, Chien said.

    On Taiwan’s demand for fishery talks, all four versions of the letter differed, he said.
    “The Philippines’ Department of Foreign Affairs and other government agencies apparently have insisted on certain wordings for the letter,” he said.

    “The final version of the letter was still very different from the first letter agreed upon in the afternoon of May 14,” he said.

    “Taiwan felt that this inconsistency shows the insincerity of the Philippine government in meeting the Taiwan government’s demands,” he added.

    Read more: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/75081/different-versions-of-letter-of-apology-show-insincerity-taiwan-representative

  4. Raissa, you are the absolute best. What an eye-opener.

    So Taiwan’s leaders got really angry because Mr. Aquino issued his own letter rather than the letter they constructed through the Philippine trade minister.

    There is nothing wrong with negotiators negotiating behind the scenes, but evidently there was a breakdown in the chain of negotiation here, in that Basilio did not have President Aquino’s authority to draft his letter, but Basilio must have projected to the Taiwanese that he (Basilio) did have such authority.

    Whatever the case, Basilio’s bridges seem to be burned burned, from both ends.

    Congrats to Martial Bonifacio for providing the initial insight and links that led to this revealing piece.

  5. It’s okay to write drafts to find what is acceptable to both parties. SOP yan. In diplomacy there is always constant communication between parties, specially allies/friends. as to the content and wording of such types of documents which are intended to keep bilateral relations friendly.

    But drafts on official letterheads containing the signatures of designated officials are no longer drafts, they are official documents. That’s wrong because it crosses the line between searching for a mutually acceptable letter and catering or capitulating to the other party’s demands.

    And not to be too nitpicky about it but why is MECO dealing directly with the Taiwanese foreign ministry? Shouldn’t it deal exclusively through the TECO? One China policy says there are no government to government dealings between the Philippines and Taiwan because we do not officially recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state. TECO and MECO were established to act as the agencies for Philippines-Taiwan relations.

  6. Raissa nawala ata yung comment tatlong comment ko? Bka napunta sa spam paki check salamat.

    Kapag pinayagan or pinabayaan ni Pnoy na pumasok ang Pilipinas sa isang “fisheries agreemnt” ganito ang kahahantungan ng mga mangingisdang pinoy.

    http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/video/nation/regions/05/22/13/shoal-row-affects-masinloc-fishermen

    Ngayon sabi sa balita ng Taiwan na nandun pa din ang coast guard nila sa site kung saan nangyari yung insidente ng PCG-BFAR. Pababayaan na lang ba natin na pati ang Batanes group of islands, Balintang channel at Babuyan islands ay isuko na rin sa Taiwan?

  7. The “draft” letters open the flood gates for Taiwan to lay claim to balintang channel.
    http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=2227491

    http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2013/05/23/2003562961

    Now in their media they keep harping on the words “disputed waters” or “overlapping EEZ”. Ang nakakalungkot pa dito is kung papaano diktahan ni President Ma si Pnoy, basahin ninyo na lang ang mga UTOS niya kay Pnoy sa mga link sa itaas. Tama talaga ang aking hinala na ang demand #4 “fishing agreement” lang ang pakay ng Taiwan. Basahin ninyo na lang sa mga news at media nila kung papaano nila inihahayag kung magkano ang nalilikom nilang pera sa mga tuna na nahuhuli sa balintang channel, batanes group of islands.

    Samantalang si Pnoy naman hindi mo maintindihan kung bakit na pinababayaan na magpatuloy hanggang ngayon na labas pasok ang mga mangingisda at mga coast guard vessel ng taiwan sa balintang channel. Naiintindihan ko in a certain degree na ayaw ni Pnoy na tumaas ang tension by sending other coast guard ships in balintang or batanes group of islands kaso ang aking pangamba is baka maging part 2 ito ng “SCARBOROUGH SHOAL!”

    Sa TV patrol nga lang ngayon e ipinakita kung anong nangyari dun sa mga dating mangingisda from masinloc zambales na ngayon ay mangangalakal na lang ang tanging ikinabubuhay. Hindi na sila makapangisda dahil itinataboy sila ng mga Chinese sa panatag shoal, nawalan na sila ng hanap buhay.

    Ang tanong is kung pababayaan din ba ni Pnoy ang mga mga mangingisdang Ivatan, tulad ng nangyari sa masinloc?

    • Ikumpara ninyo sa mga pahayag nuon ng Presidente ng Japan na si Shinzo Abe regarding senkaku:
      “There is no ownership dispute that requires resolution,”
      http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20130227-719399.html

      Which i believe is the right way. The way they handled the situation is like telling the world that they do not acknowledge the claims of both china and taiwan.

      • Yes, to Japan there is no dispute, but to China there is, and so to the outer world, there is. I agree, the Philippines needs to clearly state where her territorial boundaries rest (the extent of the Exclusive Economic Zone). The area around Batanes is contentious and I understand there are prior agreements that grant free sailing rights to Taiwan’s boats through Philippine waters. But I have not seen a map that shows very clearly where Philippine territorial limits end. After all, 200 nautical miles from Batanes wraps a good chunk of Taiwan soil into the Philippine EEZ, so it can’t be a simple 200 mile delineation. Taiwan’s leaders also speak of the 200 mile reach, which encompasses Batanes and surrounding Philippine soil. Like, man, show clearly the Philippine territory. If the authorities need a crayon to draw the Philippine nine-dash line, they can use one of my kid’s. But show us the map.

  8. Notice the difference in the two media reports of both countries:
    http://globalnation.inquirer.net/75295/taiwan-oks-visit-by-nbi-team

    http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=2227200

    I guess President Ma really likes to milk the story and of course i would not be suprised if they will issue a statement that it is Manila’s fault for delaying the investigation after this recent incident. This already happened before, last week when they sent the Taiwanese investigation team to Manila without making appointments with the DOJ or NBI.

    Kaya paguwi nila sa Taiwan sinisi nila ang Manila. Hindi manlang binanggit ni Chen Wen-Chi kung bakit sila napauwi.

    Baka nalilimutan nila that until they can prove their claim that it is “cold blooded-murder” the PCG and BFAR personnel can be free since wala pang naka sampang kaso. Ang isa pang talo dito is yung pamilya at anak nung namatay na mangingisda, pati na yung mga FIlipino at Taiwanese na patuloy sa pag babangayan sa social media.

  9. There are four (4) versions of the draft letters. Version 1 is unsigned while the other three are all signed. This the first time that I saw drafts of letters that contain full signatures of the maker and handed to the intended recipient of the official letter.

    Heads must roll for breach of national security. That is putting national interest into jeopardy. Not to mention the international criticism and difficulty that a head of state suffered due to the fiasco.

  10. It was ‘Too Close For Comfort‘

    Written drafts of supposedly exploratory talks between a sovereign nation (PH) and the state of Taiwan (ROC) to ease the simmering tensions, and dissuade the threats about to announce by Taiwan were leaked unnecessarily by Taiwan’s Foreign Ministry. It was undiplomatic, but normal or expected due to the absence of Official Diplomatic Ties between two sovereign nations.

    As you have also written, the Manila Economic and Cultural Office (MECO) is not an Embassy although it exercises delegated functions (LIKE Consular services) being the Philippines’ representative office in Taiwan. It was established in 1975 and is organized as a non-profit and non-stock private corporation under Philippine law. See MECO ph website – About MECO.

    The MECO officials let down their ‘guard’ by entrusting written exploratory ideas in letter forms, or up close personal exchanges that it appears that MECO was soliciting Taiwan’s preferred appeasments from the Philippine gov’t. A subservient approach to Taiwan, from tactless Representatives of the Phils. Must have been scared as a crow.

    The question is, why did Taiwan’s foreign ministry office leak the drafts? What sinister ploy would they gain from an emotional driven Taiwanese population? Did they clearly understand in plain english that it is not official letter from the Office of the President of the Phils.?

    As for the MECO Reps., why use your office’s business letterheads if it was indeed your drafts? You might as well stamped it as ‘For Your Consideration err Approval Dear Sirs’ before leaving it to the Taiwanese for their perusal.

    Nagkamali sila.

    • erra

      ‘that it is not an official letter…’

      In addition, if it was drafts, why sign it?

      Practice din ba? Or pick your choice draft. Any way, all have been signed.
      Add to wit, ‘On a Personal Capacity.’

      • It is quite obvious how Perez and Basilio were playing their cards. They were trying to gain favor from both sides. You know, how the ancient ministers approach their emperor and rival feudal lords.

        First, they go to the rival chief and show them 4 different treaty options with their personal seal on them.

        Envoy Basilio: “Choose 1 or 3, Oh wise Chief Ma”.

        Then, they show all 4 drafts (again) to their Emperor.

        Envoy Basilio: “Choose 1 or 3, Oh wise Emperor Noy”
        Emperor Noy: “I should have you beheaded if you insist on me approving those stupid drafts, who authorized these?”
        Envoy Basilio: “I had the blessing of chairman Perez, Sir”
        Emperor Noy: “Choose option 4”
        Envoy Basilio: “But, Sir…”
        Emperor Noy: “No, butts or I’m gonna kick yours”
        Envoy Basilio: “Very well, Sir. You are most wise. (I am so dead)”

        …And we all know what happens next. The Rival chief leaked the 4 drafts coz he think these 2 traitors are useless to them anyway. Let them face the guillotine.

        • Look at the sequence of the letters arranged in haste.

          First was in consultation between parties without necessarily weighed most from the Office of the Phils.’ President. Not a business letter nor signed. Just for starters.

          The second letter was supposedly a consolidated or accepted form of letter where the contents within was discussed between parties. Signed with business letterhead and SENT to the Taiwan Foreign Affairs Office.

          But a change of heart or mind, the Taiwanese Foreign officials prodded by their President didn’t agree and so it was rejected and gave private notice that the Taiwan gov’t. will impose sanctions against the Phils. for its lackluster stance.

          Between negotiating front line reps., MECO wrote again a THIRD letter and consulted the Office of the President of the Phils. Having done two previous consultations, MECO officials thought it was a matter of rewording and highlighting some ‘Notes’ to appease their counterpart. Signed again with in a business letterhead format, and sent away.

          Again the Taiwanese Foreign Affairs Officials, perhaps having received a spray of abuse from their President, refused again the third letter, and maybe demanded to improve the wording, grammar or spelling, move this phrase to this paragraph, make this long para into two… As a matter of discourse for domestic use, the threat of sanctions was about to be announced within hours.

          Caught in a bind between two poles, the gofers did a fourth version. yadi yadiyah … Signed in a business letterhead and paper planed to the pigeon hole of Taiwan’s yadi yadiyah …

          And the rest is history …

          —

          The labeling of draft letters were only from the Phils.’ side. Taiwans officials claims it was Official correspondences (2 to 4) in received in several instances. They maybe right, ‘palit ng palit’. It appears the MECO officials can not make up its mind on an official stance, whereby friendly (perhaps rubbing shoulders or too cordial) was aghast (No No) from their President.

          MECO was doing the ‘extra mile’ into this appeasement approach. But hey, this is not an official Diplomatic arrangement. The Phils. doesn’t officially recognized ROC as a sovereign nation. Technically, between Reps from a Phils.’ private corporation and the ROC Foreign Affairs Office.

          Hands Off din ba PNoy? Kawawa ka naman.

        • Well, I guess that gives credence to the saying “Haste make Waste”.

          Those mad cramming and scribbling away on MECO letterheads were all for naught.

          Poor Mr. Basilio, I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.

          I wonder how many actual drafts were written, those that were just crumpled and thrown into the waste bin. The ones that Taipei didn’t get to read.

        • I wonder, how much could MECO’s stationery and office supplies budget be? They’re using official letterheads as scratch papers! Maybe, our government needs to audit their paper and ink expenses.

        • buti na lang kamu, representative of a private company from the Phils. and not a diplomat from the Phils.’ gov’t.

          As a non diplomat, he’s saved from Congress’ committee hearings.

          But one couldn’t tell nowadays, now Sen N Binay might call a senate hearing on the matter.

        • the question is how many elected officials over here get perks on the sly from Taiwan

        • nasa SALNs kaya nila? campaign donors?

          do some taiwan nationals still manufacture drugs locally?
          any news lately of domestic politicians reeling for Taiwan?

        • ON TARGET
          Chinese trader corners banknotes manufacturer
          By Ramon Tulfo
          Philippine Daily Inquirer
          10:28 pm | Wednesday, May 22nd, 2013

          A Hong Kong Chinese businessman has bagged multimillion-peso projects involving the production and delivery of the country’s new generation banknotes.

          The supply of new peso bills in 20, 50, 100 and 1,000 denominations, including contracts for the supply of security components that ensure the peso bills are tamper-proof, has been cornered by companies represented by this businessman.
          I got this information from an official of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP).

          Another source at the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) says the Chinese national, surnamed Chua, facilitates the supply and delivery of security papers and other components of Philippine passports.

          What is dangerous, according to my sources, is that Chua has access to the database of all passport holders since he also represents a French company that supplies the government with passports.

          This means, my sources say, he holds the source code to its database.

          This source code, like the Commission on Elections source code for its PCOS machines, is supposed to ensure that the passport database is secure from any breach or manipulation of data.

          The French company refuses to hand over to the Philippine government the source code despite the fact that they have been required to do so.

          * * *

          If we worry about a possible invasion by China of our islands in the Spratlys, Chua’s activities in the country should be a cause for concern.

          He not only controls the supply of our currencies, he also has access to information about all citizens who are passport holders, my sources say.

          China need not invade us since it could easily sabotage the Philippine economy by flooding the market with spurious bills and allowing thousands of Chinese soldiers to enter the country using our own passports through this man.

          In short, he is virtually a Trojan horse in the Philippines, according to my sources at the BSP and DFA.

          * * *

          It could be that fake bills are already circulating in the country and were used by politicians to buy votes during the just-concluded elections. This Chinese businessman allegedly has connections in high places.

          Fugitives from justice could easily leave the country using his passports.

          The Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and National Intelligence Coordinating Agency should look into the activities of this man.

          The two intelligence agencies should investigate officials of the BSP and DFA for awarding this Chinese national with multimillion dollar high-risk projects.

          SOURCE: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/413733/chinese-trader-corners-banknotes-manufacturer

    • Its to gain International attention and support. Even here in US in the webpage of the Taiwanese embassy they posted that, ill attach the link:
      http://www.taiwanembassy.org/public/Data/35172352571.pdf

      Read also this and other press releases in their US webpage..
      http://www.taiwanembassy.org/US/ct.asp?xItem=381912&ctNode=2300&mp=12

      As i follow this news its not about finding the truth anymore, but milking the news for whatever its worth since most of their press releases already have a “conclusion” which coincides with the statements of President Ma.

  11. “We want a formal apology from the Philippine government, an impartial and thorough investigation, appropriate punishment for perpetrators, compensation to the family of the victim from the Philippine government, and the conduct of fishery talks between Taiwan and the Philippines as soon as possible in order to establish fishery orders in overlapping EEZs (exclusive economic zones)”

    According to Mr. Basilio, the above statement from the Taiwan government issued upon rejecting the letter of apology.

    Let me dissect the paragraph and see if I understand this clearly:

    1) “We want a formal apology from the Philippine government” – OK, that we already did, we regret the loss of life. It doesn’t sound quite as sincere if we were to repeat it over and over again.

    2) “an impartial and thorough investigation” – OK, we’re doing that. Impartially means either side can be at fault (we know that) Thoroughly means no stones left unturned (no whitewashing) The world is looking, we know that. I just hope that it does not come out to show both sides are fault, coz, that will only mean 1 thing which is 1side is too ashamed to admit it, so let’s just say we’re both wrong and go on with our lives.

    3) “appropriate punishment for perpetrators” – OK, punish the triggerman if he shot unprovoked with the intention to kill and not in self-defense (all these conditions must be met to be guilty) On the other hand, there are 2 sides to this story and 2 groups of people involved – The Coast Guards and the Fishermen.
    But one of the fisherman is, unfortunately, no longer alive. WHAT IF? (to be continued in #5)

    4) “compensation to the family of the victim from the Philippine government” – OK, only after condition #2 is done. And only if the fisherman was not at fault. Otherwise, what’s the point ?

    5) “and the conduct of fishery talks between Taiwan and the Philippines as soon as possible in order to establish fishery orders in overlapping EEZs (exclusive economic zones)” – HOLD your horses here!
    WHAT IF? (continued from #3) If the fishermen were the perpetrators (trying to ram their boat on our ship and sailing illegally in our waters), in this case, the fisherman’s son can easily pin the blame on the deceased father as the culprit and holds sole responsibility, case close but not over ?
    Taiwan government: “In light of recent events and in the spirit of goodwill and Poaching, let’s re-draw our maps and re-write our policies, let us encroach more into your waters and promise not to shoot us if we do” ???

    I know what happened was an unfortunate event in Taiwan-Philippine relationship but still we should not let our guards down and should take heed and not let this unfortunate event be used inappropriately to our disadvantage.

  12. The Meco officials have become too big for their boots by feeling so important and so clever that they drafted and signed the letters of apology without the blessings/ approval of the President. They have shown utter disrespect for our President. I think they don’t know the meaning of courtesy and protocol towards our President. They did their best to kowtow to the demands of Taiwan officials, thus putting our country in jeopardy, politically and militarily with Taiwan. No wonder the Taiwanese officials are so angry with us, blasting and name calling us.

    In version 2, it says” in the interest of preserving the friendly and mutually beneficial relations between the people of the Philippine and of Taiwan”, what they are trying to say ACTUALLY is ” in the pursuit of OUR INTEREST ( MR PEREZ AND MR BASILIO), we want to preserve our jobs and continue working”. They put their interest first before the interest of our country and the Filipino people. We don’t want and need these kind of Philippine envoys who will SELL US.

  13. @Observer – I’m keeping your comment for now.

    I’d like to post it as a separate piece.

    Thanks.

    Raissa

  14. “Taiwan felt that this (drafts) inconsistency shows the insincerity of the Philippine government in meeting the Taiwan government’s demands” according to Mr. Basilio.

    C’mon, how can the Taiwan government reject an OFFICIAL apology on the basis of reading UNOFFICIAL drafts?

    And why show the drafts to the Taiwanese government in the first place, this is just lame. It puts a bad light on the Philippine President. I’m not even certain, with his busy schedule, if PNoy had went through the drafts thoroughly himself or just trusted the discretion of the MECO officials.

    However we see this, it should be just a simple “apology letter” for the loss of life, plain and simple. No mentioning about compensation or administrative charges or anything until the investigation calls for such actions. Anything more than that is presumptuous and prejudging. Our government should not work on the premisses that we are at fault or otherwise.

    I am not siding with our Coast Guards, if the investigation shows that one of them is a little trigger-happy that fateful day, by all means, prosecute him, change our policies, hold bilateral meetings to sort out fishing issues, whatever . But if the investigation proves that we are not at fault, then we should be the one seeking compensation.

    • I think our envoys to Taiwan had exceeded their authority when they drafted Versions 1 and 3 of the letter of apology.

      • And obviously, they were consulting the other side while writing all 4 drafts. Now, they have the pie smacked right on their faces, that’s bogus diplomacy working for them.

    • Imagine Juan and Pedro taking a written exam, Pedro took a peek out of Juan’s test paper to copy his answer to question #1. Before submitting his test paper, Juan realizes that he had made a mistake on answer #1, so he erased it and wrote down the correct answer.

      Pedro does not realize this until after the teacher had corrected and graded the test.

      Guess what Pedro told Juan ? … “Pare, di ka pala sincere eh, kung gusto mong tulungan pumasa ako sa test, sana, di mo na binago answer mo” …DUMB

    • nakuuu, sana nagcomment na ako kanina pa pagka open ko sa new issue na eto…sayyang…ako sana nauna….jejejejjejeeeee..

      i am alwayz on the sideline perusing all your nice comments, guys..

      Peace to all.