MEDIA REACTION: TAIWAN'S WHO BID, CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 001135 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - LLOYD NEIGHBORS DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: TAIWAN'S WHO BID, CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS ¶1. Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news coverage May 19-21 on the Chen Shui-bian Administration's move to rename Chiang Kai-shek Memorial hall to "National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall" amid clashes Saturday; on the cabinet shuffle; and on China's decision last Friday to widen the trading band of its currency and to raise interest rates. The centrist, KMT-leaning "China Times" ran a banner headline on page two May 19 that said "For the Sake of Arms Procurements, [Former Chief of the General Staff] Lee Tien-yu Will Head the Ministry of National Defense; [Lee's Appointment] Is Finalized on the United States' Nod." ¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an editorial in the pro-unification "United Daily News" criticized the Chen Shui-bian administration for toying with Taiwan's bid to join the World Health Organization (WHO) in an attempt to reap political gains for himself and for the DPP. An editorial in the limited-circulation, conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" called Taiwan's WHO bid a quixotic gesture intended for domestic consumption. An op-ed piece in the limited-circulation, pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times," however, urged Taiwan to use creative approaches to pursue asymmetrical access to the WHO via modern, non-state-based channels. A "Taipei Times" editorial, on the other hand, discussed the complex cross-Strait relations and said "the government requires a firm policy that weighs economic interests against the need to maintain the nation's de facto independence and the threat posed by China's missiles and 'Anti-Secession' Law." End summary. ¶3. Taiwan's WHO Bid A) "Can Taiwan Enter the International Organization via 'Confrontation'?" The pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 400,000] editorialized (5/19): "Taiwan suffered a major defeat in its bid to join the World Health Organization (WHO),garnering record low support while the number of member states that voted against [debating Taiwan's bid] hit a record high. It is noteworthy that not only has Taiwan moved further and further away from the international community, but the Taiwan people have also grown indifferent to such diplomatic setbacks resulting from the ruler's deliberate manipulation. ... Following the [government's] fickleness over the past seven year, many Taiwan people have come to realize that Chen Shui-bian does not really intend to join the WHO; instead, he is just interested in playing the 'game of access.' Also, they have come to understand that Chen does not truly want to upgrade Taiwan's status; he was simply toying with Taiwan to reap political gains for himself and for the DPP. In this context, Taiwan is akin to being A-Bian's hostage. Would a kidnapper care about the safety of the hostage? ... "Chen does not value [Taiwan's] national dignity at all but is only keen on fooling Taiwan. He not only did not reflect on this year's setback [of Taiwan's WHO bid] but announced proudly that he will try it again on Taiwan's UN bid in September. His message was very clear: It does not matter whether Taiwan succeeds in joining the UN; [what matters are] the scar that Taiwan bears and the rage of the Taiwan people, by-products he can take advantage of and manipulate. ..." B) "A Futile, Quixotic Effort" The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" [circulation: 30,000] editorialized (5/19): "The government failed in its effort to join the World Health Organization after the body voted 148-17 against debating Taiwan's bid on Monday. The failure surprised nobody. The only surprise was how lopsided the voting result was, showing Taiwan's further isolation in the international community. This country, after all, does have 25 diplomatic allies. ... Seen in this light, Taiwan's persistent attempt to join the WHO is a gesture aimed for domestic consumption. The island's ruling party and pro-independence government need such a quixotic show to reap political gains. Everyone with a bit of common sense knows the bid is a non-starter. Why demand the impossible? Because the annual ritual, be it in Geneva or New York, can at least attract a domestic audience and also helpful in diverting the people's attention from the scandals and misrule of the administration." C) "It's Time for Asymmetric Warfare" ¶J. Michael Cole, a Taipei-based writer, opined in the pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 30,000] (5/21): "... If the WHO doesn't want Taiwan, then so be it. For the truth of the matter is, in the 21st century, Taiwan doesn't necessarily need the WHO. By turning its health system into an innovative model for research and prevention, and by actively pursuing asymmetrical access to the global health community via modern, non-state-based channels, Taiwan could bypass the archaic Cold War mentality that unfortunately prevails to this day and ensure that the right of its citizens to full information on health isn't curtailed by Beijing's narrow-mindedness. It would also help demonstrate, yet again, that when it comes to responsible global citizenship, Taiwan is light years ahead of China." ¶4. Cross-Strait Relations "Cross-Strait Complexity Increases" The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 30,000] editorialized (5/20): "... Cross-strait exchanges continue to achieve new milestones. Now the Taiwanese shuttle between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait regularly. Taiwanese businesses have spent billions of dollars in China over the past decades in investments. It is estimated that as many as a million Taiwanese work in China on a regular basis. The number of cross-strait marriages is leading to a series of new social and political issues and a new generation of children with parents from different sides of the Taiwan Strait. Under these circumstances, the reasons cited by proponents of further liberalization in cross-strait relations have long gone beyond the simple 'humanitarian' grounds from the initial opening 20 years ago. The motives now include business, political and social factors. With so many interests and ideologies constituting the cross-strait relationship, the government requires a firm policy that weighs economic interests against the need to maintain the nation's de facto independence and the threat posed by China's missiles and 'Anti-Secession' Law." YOUNG