Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
While demonstrating that the U.S. is willing to accommodate China's needs, the Bush administration must also prove to Beijing that Pyongyang's policies represent an immediate threat.

Perhaps no other country has more to lose from North Korea's acquisition of a sizeable nuclear arsenal than China. The existence of such weapons would not only endanger the city of Beijing but also provoke a regional arms race in which Japan, South Korea, and possibly even Taiwan would eventually develop their own strategic deterrents. Given these facts, it is surprising that China has not acted more forcefully to persuade Pyongyang to terminate its nuclear program.

The explanation for this reluctance is the importance Beijing attaches to regional stability. If the North Korean regime were to collapse, a refugee crisis would ensue as starving people flooded across the border into northeastern China, and the way would be opened for South Korean and American troops to advance up the peninsula towards Beijing.

If the Bush administration wants to enlist Chinese help against Pyongyang, therefore, it must first assuage these very reasonable concerns.

China's importance to the United States stems from the absence of other sources of leverage over Pyongyang. Military action against North Korea is an unattractive option because Kim Jong Il and his generals could retaliate massively. Promises of long-term economic aid in exchange for Pyongyang's renouncing its nuclear aspirations also offers little hope. Kim has a long record of consenting to such deals and then surreptitiously reviving his armament efforts.

What is needed is an intermediate form of suasion. China is the only power that possesses this sort of leverage. According to South Korean analysts, in 2002 China supplied 31 percent of North Korea's imports and accounted for 37 percent of its exports. In addition, each year Beijing gives several hundred thousand tons of food aid to its troublesome neighbor, and, now that the United States and Japan have suspended their oil shipments, provides the preponderance of its fuel.

Beijing has occasionally used its influence to express discontent with North Korean behavior, and, by all accounts, the diplomatic dialogue between the two states has also become more acrimonious of late.

However, Beijing will presumably not press Pyongyang much further unless it is assured of the Bush administration's goodwill. In practice, this means that Washington must identify and alleviate China's specific geopolitical concerns. If Beijing fears a refugee crisis, then the United States and its allies must promise to help finance the care of the displaced and perhaps to absorb some significant number of North Korean emigrants. If Beijing fears the approach of American military forces, Washington should consider promising to limit U.S. activities north of the demilitarized zone.

While demonstrating that the United States is willing to accommodate China's needs, the Bush administration must also prove that Pyongyang's policies represent an immediate threat to East Asian stability. To do this, Washington needs to engage more frequently and more conciliatorily in diplomatic talks with Kim and his representatives. For with each abortive discussion, each rejection of reasonable American gestures, the North Koreans push Beijing closer to the conclusion that they pose an unacceptable danger to China's national security interests.

The effect of this policy of dual engagement with China and North Korea would almost certainly be positive. As Beijing's attitude towards Pyongyang hardened, the world might see a sharp reduction in its oil shipments, the deployment of more troops to the North Korean border, or overt discussions with the United States about the future of the peninsula. This would be the strongest possible signal to Pyongyang, short of war, that the world will not tolerate its emergence as a major nuclear power. If, on the other hand, he remained intransigent until the intensified pressure caused North Korea to collapse, Washington and Beijing would still be relatively well situated to deal with the ensuing challenges.

It is through the joint resolution of serious challenges that potential rivals like the United States and China learn to trust each other. If there is a silver lining to the North Korean cloud, it is this opportunity to improve bilateral communications in anticipation of future exigencies.

The writer is a fellow at the Asia-Pacific Research Center, Stanford Institute for International Studies.

All News button
1
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
APARC Professor %people1% was interviewed about the 9th ASEAN summit in Bali.

October 12th will be the first anniversary of the Bali blasts which killed a total of 202 people --mostly foreign tourists. And in a move to show regional defiance against the terrorist attack on Indonesia's holiday island, leaders of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations decided last year to hold their annual meeting in Bali (7 to 8 October). Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim country, which is already reeling from two devastating bomb blasts in less than a year, the other being Jakarta's JW Marriott Hotel bomb blast, is determined to make this years ASEAN summit significant. As current chair of ASEAN, a role which is rotated alphabetically among the ten nations, Indonesia is well aware that the international community and media will be playing close attention to the outcome of this years ASEAN Bali summit. Which is why the Indonesians, building on Singapore's proposal that ASEAN evolves into an Economic Community by the year 2020, have proposed the creation of an ASEAN Security Community. For an assessment of this proposal, I spoke to Professor Donald K. Emmerson, Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Institute for International Studies. "The idea of a security community is an idea that so far as I know has originated not as a sort of deliberate doctrine of the Indonesian government but rather has been circulated in particular by an academic Rizal Sukma who wrote a paper and was invited to give the paper in New York by the Indonesian mission to the United Nations. "And I think its one of those rather serendipitous cases where an idea that has been circulating if you will in the academic world, on a track three basis if I can use that phrase, has been taken over. And it looks as though depending upon what happens at the summit in Bali, it will become a kind of distinctive contribution that Indonesia would make in the period when Indonesia will be running ASEAN, that is have the chairmanship. And so I think the first thing that needs to be said is as we know from past experience every chair of ASEAN by and large you know asks themselves what can we do that is distinctive. How will our chairmanship be remembered? And I think this is at least initially how Indonesia would like its Chairmanship to be remembered." Professor Emmerson, who is also Director of the Southeast Asia Forum at Stanford feels it does not necessarily follow from this that the Indonesian government has a clear and detailed blueprint for exactly what such a security community would entail. "That this is an idea that is still somewhat vague and properly so. After all the summit has not yet convened. We're still in the phase of position papers being circulated. If this is to become an ASEAN idea as opposed to just an Indonesian idea, then it taking ownership of the idea, ASEAN has to make its contribution because obviously there are ten countries involved, not just one, not just Indonesia. And so in a way, I think its unfair for us to ask too much detail from the host of the summit because after all the whole purpose is to socialize this idea within ASEAN and to get contributions from around the region". As to the reasons why this idea has risen to a fairly high position on the Indonesian agenda for ASEAN, Professor Emmerson feels "what we ought to think of is in more general terms how this could represent a meaningful contribution by Indonesia which has traditionally been identified obviously as the largest and by implication most important country in ASEAN, as a country that sets the tone, well this is the tone they're trying to set and I think it is not's surprising that it should not be a terribly detailed proposal at this early stage". There are existing instruments or mechanisms - one is the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation which basically serves as a foundation. The renouncement of the threat or use of force. Do you think these would be built upon and serve as a foundation for the ASEAN Security Community? "Well certainly such a use of the treaty would bethoroughly compatible with a broad understanding of what a security community might entail. But it is my impression that this idea is should we say at the same time also inward looking. That is to say if we look at it, what is first obvious is that the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), which is of course a much larger body, and it is not limited to South East Asia, it includes a variety of governments. That by implication, there is an idea here that the ASEAN Regional Forum is insufficient. That it alone cannot manage if you will the security problems that exist inside South East Asia. And it is certainly the case that the security agenda of the ARF has tended to be dominated by issues in North East Asia rather than in South East Asia. Concerns over the Korean peninsula. The Chinese of course have traditionally shied away from any multi lateral discussion of the Taiwan question which they consider to be a domestic issue. "But nevetheless the involvement of China in the ARF is of critical importance. And needless to say, if we look at the region leaving aside the issue of terrorism, which has risen obviously with particular force since the Bali bombing and then now most recently with the Marriot bombing in Indonesia. But leaving that aside one would have to say that the real security threat come not from the south but conversely from the north. "And so it is entirely plausible that Indonesian policy makers would take stock of the situation inside South East Asia and say we need a venue which is suitable for managing security inside the region. And obviously that would privilige the ASEAN Summit, the members of ASEAN rather than involving outside powers. Indeed one maybe highly speculative and here I admit I'm being extremely speculative - one might even argue that there is a logic here that says that if ASEAN can begin to organize its own house with regards to security now, then it will not have to cede the power to do so to an outsider. Whether that outsider be the United States, China, Japan or some other power". Right, looking at the summary of the Indonesian recommendations, they're proposing the idea of ASEAN Security Community by 2020. They're hoping that this will build on existing ASEAN principles and cooperation. The Indonesians hope to have an ASEAN Centre for Combating Terrorism, ASEAN Peace Keeping Training Centre, and ASEAN Maritime Surveillance Centre. Are these all feasible in the future you think? "I think they are feasible especially if the deadline is as far off as 2020. I think they are entirely feasible. Lets remember that although the idea of ASEAN being a security community is innovative because the language has not been used. If we go all the way back to the birth of ASEAN, we have to understand that there are inside the origins of ASEAN if you will, the DNA of ASEAN, there are concerns for security. The high council that was to meet to resolve inter-mural disputes among members. "The empirical fact that ASEAN's success in defending Thailand as the front line state against the Vietnamese penetration of Cambodia, which represented a signal victory given the outcome of that struggle in which the Vietnamese finally around 1989 pulled their troops back. So there was a kind of an irony at the beginning of ASEAN although it put forward a face of economic cooperation, in fact its real success was precisely in the security realm. And that's another reason why it seems to entirely feasible that some proposals, not too elaborate perhaps and not too likely to run up against the sensitivities associated with national sovereignty, might well be feasible in the future. And that yes indeed, ASEAN could become a security community. Not fully fledged, not like NATO and certainly not like SEATO which was in any case in retrospect a failure. And also not a Deutschian, you know Karl Deutsch - the American professor who really coined the phrase 'security community ' - not that kind of deep security community. But a security community that has its own techniques and instruments for conflict resolution and for conflict prevention. Including this very controversial issue which we face at the moment as to how to fight terrorism in South East Asia. "And once again I want to emphasize that traditionally Indonesian thinking with regard to the security of South East Asia has been very different for example in comparison let's say to the thinking that we associate with the view of South East Asia that tends to characterize Singaporean policy makers. The Indonesians have been much more inclined as the largest country in South East Asia to look at the region and say we don't need outsiders, we don't need a check and balance as used to be the case during the Cold War. "What we need are institutions that are domestic to the region and by implication therefore which Indonesia could influence, that will be effective in solving our problems among ourselves. I think there is a bit of that behind this proposal. And frankly I'm rather encouraged. I will say this that in so far as this proposal implies that South East Asians would take increased responsibility for their own security, including maritime security. I mean what waters on earth are the most pirate infested. We all know the answer. The answer is waters that are Indonesian or at least that border Indonesia. This is a very serious problem. And so quite apart from the issue of terrorists blowing up buildings in the name of Jihad, there are a range of security issues that South East Asians I think can constructively address. And therefore I'm quite encouraged by this proposal and I hope it will be given serious consideration in Bali."

All News button
1
-

Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou will give his only public address in Silicon Valley at Stanford University. Following a welcome by Stanford Provost John Etchemendy, Dr. Ma will speak on Taipei's Changing Role in the Global IT Industry. Mayor Ma's speech is hosted by the Stanford Project on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (SPRIE), dedicated to international and interdisciplinary research on the world's high technology regions.

About Ma Ying-jeou

Born in Hong Kong in 1950, Ma Ying-jeou was raised in Taipei, Taiwan and received law degrees National Taiwan University, NYU, and Harvard. Dr. Ma began his career by working in Boston and on Wall Street, and returned to Taiwan in 1981 to serve in the Presidential Office. He has had a distinguished career of government service, including being appointed Deputy Secretary-General for international affairs of the Kuomintang (Nationalist Party) at age 33, the youngest ever in that party. In December 1998, he won Taipei's mayoral election, unseating the popular incumbent mayor Chen Shui-bian. In 2002, he was re-elected in a landslide, winning 64.1 percent of the votes cast. During this visit to Silicon Valley, Mayor Ma will focus on Taipei's role in global high technology industries, and will meet with university and high technology company leaders.

Bechtel Conference Center

The Honorable Ma Ying-jeou Mayor of Taipei, Taiwan
Conferences
-

Following the successful migration of semiconductor foundries business to Taiwan, IC design houses are now flowing to Asia. As a result, the opportunities for venture capital investments in Greater China are increasing. Based on on-the-ground experience gained during the past ten years dealing with high-tech venture businesses between Silicon Valley and Asia, Jesse Chen will share his unique perspective on the changing dynamics of risks, timing, business sectors etc. for optimizing investments in the high tech industry in Greater China.

Jesse Chen is managing director of Maton Venture. Maton is a global venture with strategic investors and VC partners from the U.S., Europe, Japan, and Taiwan. Launched in October 1997, Maton now has thirty-two portfolio companies across Semiconductor, Communication, Software and other Information Technology industries. As of December 2002, three have gone public and five have been acquired. Jesse currently serves as board member for eleven companies.

Before Maton, Jesse co-founded BusLogic, Inc. in 1988 and served as CEO and president until it was acquired in 1996. BusLogic designed and marketed ASIC, Board and Software for the computer storage industry. Under Jesse's leadership, BusLogic achieved twenty-two quarters of consecutive growth and profitability, yielding BusLogic's first investor more than sixty times return of investment within six years. BusLogic is now part of IBM.

Jesse also served as chairman of the Global Monte Jade Science and Technology Association from 1998 to 2000 and served as Chairman of Monte Jade West from 1997 to 1998. Monte Jade has more than one thousand high tech corporate members throughout North America and Asia and more than fifty are public companies.

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, Central Wing

Jesse Chen Managing Partner Maton Venture
Seminars
-

The trend for globalization of high-tech industries has gained momentum during the last few years. In particular, the Asia Pacific region has become an increasingly important market for U.S. high tech companies. What investors, both the public market and VCs, look for now are companies with revenue growth and a clear path to profit. The challenge for technology companies and investors is to define the roadmap to weather through the current downturn and build strength to grow when the market returns. The companies that will succeed are the ones that are close to the market, with the ability to produce their products at a reduced cost.

China, with its mass population, is undeniably an enormous market. It not only presents a broad customer base for the high-tech industry, but also an attractive low-cost manufacturing center. There is no doubt that Greater China is a lucrative region to ride the next wave of high-tech industry growth. We all want to capture this golden opportunity. How do we address this huge consumer market? How do we fully utilize the emerging labor support to lower production costs? For venture capitalists, how do we find legitimate ways to get return on our investments?

Taiwan is now China's leading trade partner and investor. Over 25 percent of Taiwan's exports are headed to China, according to the latest official statistics. With its geographic proximity, a well-established technology and business support infrastructure, as well as a common language and similar culture background, Taiwan is well positioned as a gateway to the China. In addition, Taiwan has built a well-recognized capital market in the past three decades. This highly liquid capital market is the best support for the high-tech industry as well as VC players.

In this session, Katherine Jen, a veteran venture capitalist, will lead the audience through her strategy in the quest for the next wave of high-tech industry growth and identify the key success factors.

About the Speaker

Katherine Jen is the managing partner of AsiaTech Management, LLC, a venture capital firm investing in the Silicon Valley and Asia. Katherine's successful venture capital career began in the early eighties. During her two decades in the Ministry of Finance in Taiwan, Katherine ran a $3 billion government investment fund, instrumental in the founding of successful high-tech companies such as TSMC and Moses-Vitelic. She also served on the TSMC board of directors from 1989-1993.

Katherine was one of the pioneers in Taiwan's VC industry. She led many key initiatives in venture capital legislations, including the adoption of the first Venture Capital Act in Taiwan. She helped establish the first group of venture capital funds in Taiwan, including Hotung Ventures, H&Q Asia and Walden International Taiwan (IVCIC). In addition, she founded the venture capital firm Genesis Venture in Taiwan and successfully raised its first fund. As a leader in the Taiwan financial industry, she served on the board of International Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), the largest commercial bank in Taiwan.

Based on the belief that Silicon Valley technologies can find much broader markets if they are combined with the efficient manufacturing industry in Asia, she founded AsiaTech and raised its first fund in 1997. Today, with operations in the Silicon Valley and Taiwan, AsiaTech manages three funds with strong backing from Asian-based manufacturing companies, commercial and investment banks, and government.

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, Central Wing

Katherine Jen Managing Partner AsiaTech Management LLC
Seminars
-

Seeking to tap the huge potential of Greater China, many in Asia seek to replicate the Silicon Valley model. Yet, as much art as it is science, successful VC investing has proven to be uneven in Asia. Why? With respect to innovation, why is it that Asians have good reputations for replicating but not creating cutting edge technology? Is there a disconnect when this is compared to the experiences of U.S. high-tech icons, such as Intel and Apple, filled with Asian-born -- and in many cases educated -- scientists and businessmen? How does the Silicon Valley experience track with Singapore's determined efforts to promote creativity? What lessons, if any, are applicable to Greater China? With respect to entrepreneurship in Greater China, it is clear that Hong Kong, Taiwan and the Mainland are full of hard-driving individuals seeking to build wealth and prosperity. However, in some ways, is there perhaps an overabundance of entrepreneurship? Are there too many in this part of the world who want to be in charge and too few to follow and implement? How can a more productive form of entrepreneurship be fostered?

About the speaker
Dr. Ta-lin Hsu is chairman and founder of H&Q Asia Pacific (H&QAP), a premier private equity firm investing in Asia and the U.S. since 1985. Through ten offices in the region, H&QAP invests in a variety of high-growth sectors, including technology, biotech, financial services, media and branded consumer products. H&QAP manages sixteen funds with approximately $1.6 billion in assets invested in over 250 portfolio companies. Three of these funds comprise $1.1 billion in assets and invest on a diversified basis across the Asia Pacific region while the remaining thirteen funds are country funds.

Dr. Hsu holds numerous advisory positions with governmental and industry organizations. He was a founding member of the prestigious Technology Review Board of Taiwan, a group established to advise the Executive Yuan on all technology matters. Dr. Hsu was also a founder of the Monte Jade Science & Technology organization, the premier nonprofit organization promoting technology exchange between Taiwan and the U.S. He was also a founder and first president of the Bay Area Chapter of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, the largest Chinese-American engineering society in the U.S.

Dr. Hsu received his Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the University of California, Berkeley following a M.S. in electrophysics from the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn and a B.S. in physics from National Taiwan University. He was a staff scientist at Allied Chemical for two years before joining IBM Research Laboratories in 1973. Dr. Hsu worked at IBM for twelve years, reaching the position of senior manager in the research division -- with corporate responsibility for advanced research and development of mass storage systems and technology -- before joining Hambrecht & Quist as a general partner in 1985.

Dr. Hsu is an Advisory Board Member of the the University of California, Berkeley, Haas School of Business, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a member of the Board of Trustees of the Asia Foundation.

Philippines Conference Room

Dr. Ta-Lin Hsu Chairman and Founder Hambrecht & Quist Asia Pacific
Seminars
-

This seminar is part 5 of SPRIE's 5-part series on "Greater China: Entrepreneurial Leaders."

With China's fast growth pace, the build-up of its communication network is one important factor to ensure continuous growth. However, with the gloomy economy in the rest of the world, China's service providers are adjusting their investment strategy. Understanding the dynamics in the Greater China region will help capture market opportunity.

Mr. Gwong-Yih Lee is a distinguished entrepreneur, leader, and visionary in the emerging telecom market. Currently, he serves as a senior director of Global Solutions at Cisco Systems. Prior to Cisco, Mr. Lee was founder and chairman/CEO of TransMedia Communications, Inc. Acquired by Cisco in 1999 at the value of approximately $500 million, TransMedia builds products that capitalize on the opportunities created by the convergence of data, voice, and video. In 1999, TransMedia was selected as "Best of Breed" startup by the industry's top venture capitalists.

In May 1987, Mr. Lee founded Digicom Systems, Inc., a company devoted to high-speed modern communications applications in both software algorithms and hardware. Digicom has developed, manufactured, marketed, and supported a full continuing line of high speed communications products and was acquired by Creative Technology, Ltd. In 1994, prior to Mr. Lee's founding Digicom Systems, he held positions as a senior engineering manager with Silicon Valley firms including Anderson Jacobson, Racal-Datacom, and Cermetek Microelectronics.

Mr. Lee received a bachelor's degree from National Chiao-Tung University in Taiwan and a master's degree in electrical engineering from New York State University.

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, Central Wing

Gwong-Yih Lee Senior Director and General Manager Cisco Systems
Seminars
-

This seminar is part 2 of SPRIE's 5-part series on "Greater China: Entrepreneurial Leaders."

From a venture capital investor's perspective, what are the key opportunities and challenges of doing business in China in the current environment? Why? How is China's emerging private equity investment industry? What are the major differences between "home-grown" Chinese private equity firms and foreign capital firms? Bobby Chao will address these questions, based on personal experience gained over the past twenty years.

Bobby Chao began his career as one of the five original founders of Cadence Design Systems. A year after Cadence's successful IPO, Bobby founded Ocron, a leader in Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology and document management software. Bobby was chairman and CEO of Ocron until Umax Technologies, Inc. acquired it. He then became part of the Umax team serving as senior vice president of marketing in charge of corporate marketing and investment. Bobby was previously general partner for Technology Associates Management Company and has served as chairman and CEO of VA Linux Systems.

Mr. Chao currently serves as chairman of Dragon Venture Inc., a cross-pacific venture capital, consulting, and M&A company, bridging the U.S. and Greater China markets. Portfolio companies focus on telecommunications, Internet infrastructure, Linux, fables IC designs, and EDA. Mr. Chao is currently on the board of several companies and professional organizations.

Mr. Chao holds a B.S. in physics from Taiwan, an M.S. in physics from Georgia State University, and an M.S. in aeronautical engineering from Stanford University.

Philippines Conference Room

Seminars
-

This seminar is part 1 of SPRIE's 5-part series on "Greater China: Entrepreneurial Leaders."

For a long time, researchers have asked whether the success of Silicon Valley can be replicated elsewhere. There have been various levels of attempts and various levels of success outside the United States.

Depending on how success is measured, one can draw different conclusions. How do we evaluate Hsinchu Science Park? Have they created innovative products? Have they produced entrepreneurs? How do they stack up to Silicon Valley? What is their competitive edge? As China joins the WTO, what should its strategy be?

On a long-term basis, what are the factors that will drive and deliver sustainable competitive advantages? With changes in global economic conditions, how does one re-evaluate the Silicon Valley model? As China joins the WTO, what should its strategy be? And as China becomes the manufacturer of the world, what is its impact on Taiwan and Silicon Valley?

This talk offers an analysis of experiences in Silicon Valley and Asia in the past twenty years. It also offers some reflections on the model and strategy for Greater China.

Since November 1998, Sha has been a managing partner at Spring Creek Venture, which specializes in early-stage venture investment and business consultation with Internet and infrastructure companies. Sha is currently serving on the board of directors of several start-up companies, including Appstream, Acela, Aduva, E21, LiveABC, Optoplex, Mediostream, and Tom.com.

Sha has extensive experience as a leader of high technology companies. He served as CEO for Sina.com and senior vice president of Commerce Solutions at Netscape Communications. While at Netscape, he served concurrently as president and CEO of Actra Business Systems, a joint venture formed by Netscape and GE Information Services. A company Sha built from scratch, Actra was the first company to focus on business-to-business e-commerce and e-procurement application systems. Prior to Actra, Mr. Sha served as vice president and general manager of business-to-consumer integrated application business at Netscape Communications and vice president of the UNIX Product Division at Oracle Corporation.

In his community service, Sha served as chairman of the Monte Jade West Coast association from 2000-2001. Sha currently is serving as chairman of the Monte Jade Global Association, the premier technology entrepreneur association with twelve chapters in the United States, Canada, Singapore, and Taiwan.

Mr. Sha holds an MS in EECS from the University of California at Berkeley, an MBA from Santa Clara University, and a BS in EE from Taiwan University.

Philippines Conference Room

James C. Sha Managing Partner Spring Creek Venture
Seminars
Subscribe to Taiwan