MEDIA REACTION: CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000536

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - ERIC
BARBORIAK
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON

SIPDIS



E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS



1. Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies
continued February 18-21 to report on the aftermath of
President Chen Shui-bian's Lunar New Year's Day proposal to
abolish the National Unification Council, and the
controversy sparked by a KMT advertisement Tuesday in which
(for the first time) the party included Taiwan independence
as a possible option for the Taiwan people to choose for
their future. Coverage also focused on the U.S. arms
procurements, the computer war games related to the Hankuang
Exercise for 2006, and a new research report released Sunday
regarding the February 28 Incident of 1947. The pro-status
quo "China Times" ran an exclusive interview with an
unidentified senior Bush administration official on its
front page with the headline: "U.S. Official Warns Bian:
[He] Will Have to Bear All the Consequences If [He Insists
on] Abolishing the National Unification Council (NUC) and
National Unification Guidelines (NUG)." The newspaper also
spent two thirds of its second page and the entire third
page running excerpts of the interview and relevant news
stories on Chen's plan to abolish the NUC and NUG. Taiwan's
biggest daily, the pro-independence "Liberty Times,"
appeared to make an effort to refute the "China Times"
interview by running a banner headline on its second page
February 19 that read: [Taiwan] Government Official:
Abolition of NUC and NUG Is Aimed at Maintaining the Status
quo [across the Taiwan Strait]".

Following the publication of the results of a "Liberty
Times" survey last Thursday, both the pro-unification
"United Daily News" and pro-status quo "China Times"
published their own separate opinion surveys February 18 and
February 20 (respectively) with regard to President Chen's
Lunar New Year's Day's proposal to abolish the NUC and NUG.
The "United Daily News" survey showed that 35 percent of
those polled oppose Chen's proposal while 18 percent said
they supported it. The "China Times" survey also showed
that 32 percent of the respondents said they were against
Chen's proposal while 21 percent said they supported it.
The "United Daily News" also carried a news story on its
page four February 19 with the headline: "To Resolve the
Controversy over [Chen's Proposal] to Abolish NUC and NUG,
Bian Plans to Reiterate the Four No's Pledge Without the
Last `No."'


2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, editorials of
the "Liberty Times" and the two limited-circulated, pro-
independence, English-language "Taipei Times" and "Taiwan
News" all criticized KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou's discourse
on cross-Strait relations, saying Ma is moving further away
from mainstream Taiwan public opinion. An editorial in
"China Times" pointed out that along with Chen's plan to
abolish NUC and NUG and the DPP's plan to present its
version of the new constitution, the DPP has also worked out
a timetable for an overall rescission of [Chen's] `Five
No's' pledge. A separate "China Times" commentary said
Washington will no longer tolerate Chen's behavior. An
editorial in the limited-circulated, conservative, pro-
unification, English-language "China Post" urged Washington
to directly stop Chen from abolishing the NUC and NUG;
according to the paper, their abolition would mark "the
beginning of Taiwan's disintegration and fall." End
summary.

A) "Ma Ying-jeou Moving Further Away from Taiwan's
Mainstream Public Views"

The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 600,000]
editorialized (2/20):

". The status quo of Taiwan today is that it is a nation
whose sovereignty is independent outside the People's
Republic of China, a fact that not even the Beijing
authorities can deny. The fact that many Taiwan people,
when polled, chose the option of maintaining the status quo
showed that they expected to see Taiwan's sovereignty remain
independent outside the PRC. On the other hand, however, it
was also a choice made in the face of China's military
threats [against the island]. Based on the cross-references
of various opinion surveys [conducted in Taiwan], a majority
of Taiwan people, if compelled to make a choice, would
bravely choose the position of Taiwan being an independent
sovereign state. .

"In other words, for [KMT Chairman] Ma Ying-jeou, the so-
called `maintaining the status quo' is nothing but a
transitional period to the `ultimate unification' [between
Taiwan and China]. Such a position, if viewed from a long-
term perspective, will definitely destroy the status quo of

Taiwan's independent sovereignty. Thus, the `maintaining of
the status quo' as repeatedly claimed by Ma is nothing but
another name used to block Taiwan from becoming a normal
country.

"The prior three presidential elections in Taiwan have
proved that Taiwan people have absolutely despised foreign
regimes. Ma, who aspires to win support of most Taiwan
people but is constantly [doing things] to jeopardize the
status quo Taiwan's sovereignty, is in reality moving
further away from Taiwan's mainstream public views."

B) "Ma Takes a Winning Approach"

The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times"
[circulation: 30,000] wrote in an editorial (2/18):

". Ma's recent olive branch to pan-green-cam supporters in
the form of a `Liberty Times' advertisement on Wednesday
marked a turning point: The ad's concession to entrenched
support for self-determination and its dismissal of coercion
as a tool for unification will likely turn out to be one of
the most important local political developments in recent
years. . Taiwanese can be expected to back Ma for the next
presidency if he continues with this approach. It may yet
turn out to be the biggest gift Taiwan could hope for. .

"Let us assume for the moment that Ma is elected president -
and that his apparent goodwill to the pan-green voter is
sincere. If his stint in office is successful, his KMT
successor will need to emulate him and defend Taiwanese self-
determination. Otherwise, a humbled and reconfigured DPP
will probably replace him, either in four years or eight.
Any of these options would surely make supporters of
Taiwanese self-determination of all colors shiver with
pleasure."

C) "Ma's Future Choice Between Realism and Opportunism"

The pro-independence, English-language "Taiwan News"
[circulation: 20,000] said in an editorial (2/20):

". From the perspective of Taiwan's democratic
consolidation, for a century-old KMT to respect Taiwan's
people's right to decide its own fate and its future
relationship with China is a great leap forward compared to
its long-time habit of imposing its pro-unification doctrine
on our people with scant regard for the will of the public.
However, whether or not Ma is sincere in respecting the
freedom of choice of local citizens remains in doubt. .

"As maintaining the status quo of Taiwan as an independent
and democratic country has become the mainstream value in
Taiwan, it is understandable that Ma would test the water by
tossing out a concept that would, at least on the surface,
seem to respect local citizen's right of free choice. But
is Ma doing these really for the national interests of
Taiwan? Can he encounter successfully the hard-core pro-
unification forces from the pan-blue camp, including the old-
guard led by Lien Chan? Or is Ma simply an opportunist
politician who only has his eyes on stealing away DPP
voters? . If Ma wishes to show his qualifications to be
president, he should lead the KMT to respect this mainstream
democratic principle."

D) "We Can Do Nothing But Simply Watch Taiwan Bear the
Consequences"

The pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation: 400,000]
editorialized (2/20):

"It looks like President Chen and the DPP are really ready
to have a clash with his `Five No's' pledge! Despite the
overwhelming pressure from Washington, Chen seems completely
unwavering. Presidential Office Secretary-General Mark Chen
has made it very clear that President Chen `hopes' that the
proposal to abolish the National Unification Council and
National Unification Guidelines `would be clearly dealt with
by the end of February.' .

"On the other hand, the DPP is taking the advantage of this
opportunity to present its version of Taiwan's new
constitution. The DPP also made it very clear that it will
set no restrictions on any issues [concerning the new
constitution], namely, [it will touch on issues] including
[Taiwan's] national flag, national title and its territory.
If the `proposal to abolish National Unification Council and
National Unification Guidelines' directly scraps the last
`No' in Chen `Five No's' pledge, the [DPP's] planned new
constitution which will touch on [Taiwan's] territory and
national title will be a direct move to tear down the
remaining `Four No's'. Even though the DPP's version of
Taiwan's new constitution will not come out until June, it
seems that it has already had a `conclusion;' after all, how
would it be called the DPP's `new constitution' if it fails
to talks about [Taiwan's] territory and national title? In
other words, [it is evident that the DPP] already worked out
a timetable for overall rescission of [Chen's] `Five No's'
pledge. .

"The core issue is actually very clear; namely, it has never
been a logical question as to `who is changing the status
quo across the Taiwan Strait' but a question of `who is
defining the status quo'. And there is already an answer to
the question. The United States has said very clearly
earlier that it is Uncle Sam, not Beijing or Taipei, who is
in the lead of defining the cross-Strait status quo. This
is the reason why President Chen said last year that `there
is no way that [he] can succeed in pushing for' Taiwan
independence and writing a new constitution.

"By the same token, perhaps the impact created by Chen's
insistence on `abolishing the National Unification Council'
will not be the highlighting of whether Beijing has
unilaterally altered the status quo but the fact that Chen
has attempted to snatch the `right to define [the cross-
Strait status quo].' . While the United States is extremely
busy in handling [problems] in Iraq, Iran and North Korea,
will it be very polite to Taiwan, which came out trying to
grasp the right to define the `cross-Strait status quo'? ."

E) "The United States Remains Firm and Resolute; What Will
Be A-Bian's Next Step?"

Washington correspondent Norman Fu said in the "Washington
Outlook" column of the pro-status quo "China Times"
[circulation: 400,000] (2/18):

". It is not difficult to tell from the words of the U.S.
official interviewed [by this journalist] that the United
States has reached the last critical moment that it will no
longer tolerate or appease A-bian. Washington's strategy
[toward Chen] is thinly veiled toughness, mild and severe at
the same time. The mild part is that Washington did not
forget to show friendship and goodwill to Taiwan. But the
severe part is that when it comes to policy, Washington
offers absolutely no room for negotiation, because if it
yields again, it will jeopardize the U.S. interests, a
development that Washington can by no means accept. As a
result, A-bian will have to make his policy match that of
the United States and adopt measures to mend the rifts and
gaps between his and the U.S. policies. ."

F) "Can U.S. Rein in Chen?"

The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China
Post" [circulation: 30,000] said in an editorial (2/21):

"President Chen Shui-bian appears determined to go ahead
with his plan to scrap the dormant 1991 National Unification
Council despite repeated U.S. warnings against it. His
administration and the ruling DPP are trying everything to
justify Chen's move, which is an outright breach of trust of
the people and the U.S. Washington is upset for being
entangled in such an unexpected, annoying and unnecessary
spin with a protg, when crisis in Iraq, Iran, North Korea
and the Middle East demand its full attention. The U.S.
deserves this, as it has left Taiwan's pro-independence
leader and his supporters believe there is room for them to
fool around.

"No wonder separatism has been on the rise in recent years;
and the possibility of a cross-strait war has drastically
increased. U.S. ambiguity on ideas of unification and
independence is the main culprit. The two conflicting
options were put forward by the Chen-DPP government after it
assumed power in 2000. .

"The U.S.-defined status quo, a compromise for peace between
Washington and Beijing, does not allow Taiwan's separation
n
from China or reunification with the mainland by force.
Taiwan's people have accepted it. Chen's latest plan to
scrap the last `No' in his `Five Nos' pledge is but a gambit
for domestic consumption to rescue his crumbling authority.
Nip his ploy forthrightly and stop it from becoming a
mockery of the U.S. and the beginning of Taiwan's
disintegration and fall. Only the U.S. can do this."

KEEGAN