MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-CHINA-TAIWAN RELATIONS

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 001269 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - DAVID FIRESTEIN DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-CHINA-TAIWAN RELATIONS Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news coverage June 6 on the year-end legislative elections and 2008 presidential election; on a suspected arson attack that killed a family of four in Kaohsiung Tuesday; on the recent plunge of the Chinese stock market; and on other local issues. In terms of editorials and commentaries, a column in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" discussed a recent news story quoting an ex-chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell as saying that hawkish U.S. officials had encouraged President Chen Shui-bian's administration to move toward a declaration of independence. The article called such an accusation "ridiculous." An op-ed in the pro-independence "Liberty Times" said President Chen Shui-bian misunderstands the Taiwan Relations Act, as neither the U.S. State Department nor the Congress regard Taiwan as a country. An op-ed by Doug Bandow, the Robert A. Taft Fellow at the American Conservative Defense Alliance, carried by the limited-circulation, pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" said "Washington, along with its Asian and European friends, should seek to integrate China into regional and global institutions, rather than work to thwart the PRC's rise." A separate "Taipei Times" op-ed by J. Michael Cole, a writer based in Taipei, however, said "[I]f Washington means what it says about facilitating a peaceful resolution to the Taiwan Strait conflict, it had better reconsider the dangerous arms race it is on the verge of sparking in Northeast Asia and embark upon solid, relentless diplomacy that truly addresses the imbalance of power." End Summary. A) "Severe Infighting in Washington Spreads to Taiwan" Columnist Antonio Chiang noted in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 520,000] (6/6): "... [Colin] Powell's chief of staff accused [Donald] Rumsfeld of secretly supporting Taiwan independence, while latter's spokesman SIPDIS responded using words such as 'ridiculous' and 'insane' to indicate that such an accusation was not even worth refuting. The reason of dragging the thick-headed Therese Shaheen into the game was because her husband used to serve as the spokesman for Rumsfeld, and [the accusation] was meant to get revenge for his boss [i.e. Powell]. Most people inside the Washington circle just laughed it off. "The Pentagon is in charge of military, security and strategy, and it stays alert about China. Its position differs greatly from that of the State Department's. But people in the Pentagon are [also] quite worried about Taiwan's military buildup and disappointed with Taiwan stalling the arms procurements. Given such a situation, Powell's chief of staff would be either very unprofessional or preposterous to claim that the Pentagon had often sent officials to Taipei to encourage A-Bian to move toward a declaration of independence." B) "A-Bian Misunderstands the TRA; the United States Does Not Regard Taiwan as a Country" Frank Chiang, president of the U.S.-based Taiwan Public Policy Council in the U.S. and a professor at Fordham University School of Law, opined in the pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 500,000] (6/6): "News reports on May 30 quoted President Chen Shui-bian as saying during a video conference with the National Press Club that 'the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) approved by the U.S. Congress determines that Taiwan is a country ... and Taiwan is therefore entitled to join the international organizations.' Chen's statement likely intended to advocate that Taiwan's current status is [equivalent to that of] a country, but it would be far-fetched to cite the TRA to prove that Taiwan is a nation! ... Neither the U.S. State Department nor the Congress regards the Republic of China or Taiwan as a country. Exactly because of this, the U.S. Congress formulated the TRA. ... "The United States adopted the TRA in an attempt to protect the security of the Taiwan people and the United States' interests in the Western Pacific. Had the ROC or Taiwan been a country, the U.S. government would have concluded a joint defense treaty with it and would not have had to adopt such a circuitous approach. ... Thus the TRA does not regard Taiwan's current status as [that of] a country. ..." C) "A New Peril or Partner in the East?" Doug Bandow, the Robert A. Taft Fellow at the American Conservative Defense Alliance, opined in the pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 30,000] (6/6): "... In the longer-term, China could become a hostile peer competitor to the US, though cooperation would seem to be a better strategy than confrontation for Beijing to win international influence. Moreover, while the PRC has much promise, it also faces many challenges. The PRC could also pose a regional challenge. But then China's neighbors, including Taiwan, India and Russia, would have an incentive to cooperate with each other. Moreover, Japan, South Korea, Australia and Taiwan retain the nuclear option. The mere possibility of the spread of nuclear weapons provides the PRC with a persuasive reason to remain a good regional citizen. For China, other Asian nations and the US, accommodation makes more sense than confrontation where vital interests are not at stake. "While downgrading the potential for military conflict, the US should press China about concerns ranging from human rights to proliferation to Taiwan. Overall, Washington, along with its Asian and European friends, should seek to integrate China into regional and global institutions, rather than work to thwart the PRC's rise. Ultimately, Washington must accept, however reluctantly, its new partner in Asia." D) "A Regional Arms Race Is No Answer" ¶J. Michael Cole, a writer based in Taipei, opined in the pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 30,000] (6/6): "... What Washington is accomplishing in Northeast Asia is a militarization of the region, an outcome it conveniently blames on Beijing's military build-up. No one, however, asks whether Beijing's modernization of its military might not be in response to the sense of encirclement that the bolstered US-Japan alliance has engendered. Regardless of the efficiency of the types of weapons Washington has been pressing on Taiwan -- raising this question often results in accusations of Taipei 'freeloading' on defense -- the pressure is on Washington, through various defense lobbies, to complete the transaction. Past experience, with Saudi Arabia providing a lurid example, shows that billions of dollars of US weapons cannot guarantee the security of a state. ... Given the force disparities between China and Taiwan, it is unlikely that a few additional air defense systems, along with some submarines, would represent so formidable a deterrent as to make Beijing think twice before launching an attack. ... "The flaw in Washington's strategy of militarizing the region, however, is that it is predicated on a flawed understanding of deterrence, with its proponents having developed the concept during a very different era - the Cold War. ... If Washington means what it says about facilitating a peaceful resolution to the Taiwan Strait conflict, it had better reconsider the dangerous arms race it is on the verge of sparking in Northeast Asia and embark upon solid, relentless diplomacy that truly addresses the imbalance of power. Given the stakes, the world simply cannot afford to put its faith in militarization and deterrence. This is just asking for catastrophe." YOUNG