YOU SAY "CEASING," WE SAY "ABOLISHING"

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TAIPEI 000677 SIPDIS NOFORN SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/03/2036 TAGS: PGOV PREL TW SUBJECT: YOU SAY "CEASING," WE SAY "ABOLISHING" REF: A. TAIPEI 597 ¶B. TAIPEI 598 Classified By: AIT Acting Director David J. Keegan, Reasons 1.4 (b/d). ¶1. (C) Summary: After President Chen announced February 27 that the National Unification Council (NUC) "ceased to function" and the National Unification Guidelines (NUG) "ceased to apply," Taiwan politicians and commentators have universally said simply that both the NUC and NUG have "ceased." "Ceased" has become a synonym for "abolished." Chen administration leaders have contributed to this misconception, which no official has tried to correct. AIT's contacts and other observers here view Chen's change from "abolish" to "cease to function" and "cease to apply" as a small concession to the U.S. that softens the language but does not alter the substantive meaning of Chen's action. The Chen administration will need to set the record straight soon. If they do not, the common wisdom will be that the NUC has been abolished, when in fact only the wording has changed. End Summary. ¶2. (C) In his formal February 27 decision, and his announcement on the anniversary of the 1947 "February 28th incident," President Chen has been careful to use the full expressions "cease to function" and "cease to apply," which in themselves do not mean abolition. However, in his February 28 speech, Chen also said that the NUC and NUG have "gone into history," and he further implied that they no longer exist when he suggested that "the continued existence, functioning, and application of the NUC and NUG" would create uncertainty over whether the status quo might one day be changed undemocratically. In addition, the NUC page on the Presidential Office website was immediately erased when President Chen signed the order to implement his decision, which again suggests the NUC and NUG either no longer exist or exist only "in history." ¶3. (SBU) In response to a question on why President Chen used "cease" rather than "abolish," Presidential Office Secretary General Mark Chen explained at the press conference SIPDIS following the president's announcement that because of world attention, including from the U.S. and Japan, Taiwan had carefully selected an appropriate English term -- "cease to function" -- which the officials then translated into Chinese. At the same press conference, National Security Council Secretary General Chiou I-jen asserted that "cease" is a legal term while "abolish" is not. Neither Chen nor Chiou stated that "cease to function/apply" meant anything different from "abolish." ¶4. (C) Several hours before Chen's announcement on February 27, Kuomintang (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou said that whether to "abolish" or "cease" the NUC is only "semantics," suggesting that he viewed the two terms as interchangeable. After Chen's announcement, Ma angrily supported a KMT move in the Legislative Yuan to recall Chen, a move from which he had earlier distanced himself. Ma's statement and action on February 27 would have suggested to Ma's pan-Blue supporters that he believed Chen had in effect abolished the NUC and NUG despite strong objections from the pan-Blue and others. ¶5. (SBU) The two-character phrase being widely used here for Chen's action is "ceasing unification" (zhong-tong) which is shorthand for "the National Unification Council's ceasing to function and ceasing to apply the National Unification Guidelines." The Chinese term "cease" can also be translated as "terminate" and most people interpret "NUC/NUG ceasing" to mean the termination of the two entities. The distinction that what has ceased are the NUC's functions and the NUG's application but not the NUC and NUG themselves has escaped most, but not all observers. In popular parlance, the phrase zhong-tong is being used to connote cessation or termination of the NUC and NUG, so that the notion that the NUC and NUG themselves have ceaed to exist has already taken deep root in the public imagination. ¶6. (SBU) The ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is holding a march to "protect democracy and oppose annexation" TAIPEI 00000677 002 OF 002 on March 18, which will mark a number of developments and anniversaries, especially the first anniversary of the PRC anti-secession law. According to a March 1 DPP press release, this march will have deep historical significance because among other reasons it takes place at a time when President Chen has announced the "cessation of the NUG" and the return to the Taiwan people of the final right to decide Taiwan's future. When ADIR met March 3 with DPP Chairman Yu Shyi-kun, Yu made it clear that he considered there to be no meaningful difference among "abolish (fei-chu)" the NUC, the NUC "ceasing (zhong-zhi)," and the NUC "ceasing to function (zhong-zhi yun-zuo)." ¶7. (C) Most of AIT's contacts and other observers here view Chen's change from "abolish" to "cease to function" as a small concession to the U.S. that softens the language but does not alter the substantive meaning of Chen's action. Some on both the Blue and Green sides of the political spectrum claim that Chen has outplayed the U.S. In their view, during the period prior to February 27, the U.S. was reacting very toughly to Chen's proposal to abolish the NUC and NUG. This tough U.S. reaction led the pan-Blue to take heart and the deep Green to bring several groups of protesters to the AIT office in Taipei. However, observers were surprised by the outcome, believing that the U.S. toned down its reaction a great deal in return for a limited concession by Chen. Some have been less polite. Examination Yuan President Yao Chia-wen, a deep Green independence fundamentalist, said to AIT, "Chen tricked you." Comment -------------- ¶8. (C) The Chen administration has not made it clear that there is a substantive difference between "cease to function (apply)" and "abolish;" which has helped muddy the distinction between the two terms. Observers here are beginning to discuss the point that the distinction is important, and it remains to be seen whether the government will feel compelled to finally make clear that it is the functions and application of the NUC and NUG, not the NUC and NUG themselves, that have "ceased." Premier Su Tseng-chang missed a chance to clarify the issue when he was peppered with questions by opposition KMT legislators on March 3; he will have a more difficult time avoiding the issue in the legislative session scheduled for March 6 specifically to discuss the NUC and NUG issue. The Chen administration will need to set the record straight soon. If they do not, the common wisdom will be that the NUC has been abolished, when in fact only the wording has changed. KEEGAN