MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-TAIWAN RELATIONS

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 002606 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - NIDA EMMONS DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-TAIWAN RELATIONS ¶1. Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news coverage December 13 on an Austrian base jumper who jumped from the Taipei 101 skyscraper Tuesday; on the 2008 presidential election and the UN referendum; and on the aftermath of the abrupt closing of the largest health club chain in Taiwan Monday. The pro-independence "Liberty Times" ran a banner headline on page two that said "Frank Hsieh: No Way Bian Will Influence Me after May 20, 2008." ¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, a "Liberty Times" editorial said the U.S. opposition to Taiwan's UN referendum will only aggrieve the Taiwan people but gladden China. A "Liberty Times" commentary slammed AIT Chairman Raymond Burghardt's recent remarks on Taiwan's UN referendum, saying Washington's worry about Taiwan's peaceful change of leadership is the biggest humiliation for Taiwan's democracy. A separate "Liberty Times" analysis said Washington is eager to seek commitments from Taiwan's new president. Editorials in the two pro-independence, English-language dailies -- "Taipei Times" and "Taiwan News" -- also chimed in by criticizing Washington for insulting Taiwan's democracy. A column in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" said what President Chen Shui-bian has done has resulted in the souring of Washington-Taipei ties. An analysis in the centrist, KMT-leaning "China Times" said the United States has already set the tone for Taiwan's future direction. An analysis in the pro-unification "United Daily News" said Washington will not allow President Chen to do whatever he pleases. An editorial in the conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post," however, urged Taiwan to heed the U.S.'s admonition. End summary. A) "The United States' Opposition to [UN] Referendum Will Only Aggrieve [the Taiwan] People and Gladden the Enemy" The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 720,000] editorialized (12/13): "... The question is: Why did the United States have such sensitive reactions to Taiwan's UN referendum? ... Why did the United States turn a blind eye to China's 'alteration of the status quo' why focusing its criticism against Taiwan's UN referendum? Of course the United States has its practical reasons. Just as Thomas Christensen stated, 'the United States believes that the UN referendum is a force for tension and instability, and where tension and instability leads is difficult to predict,' the answer is that the consequences will be 'difficult to predict,' and the 'hard-to-predict consequences' refers to China's reaction and action. In other words, the national and military strengths of China have grown so powerful now that they make it difficult for the United States to decide whether it wants' to wage war against China at any cost.' ... "The shrewd and calculating United States is certainly aware of the growth and decline in the military and economic powers between China and the United States. But China is no longer as weak as it was before, and this is the reason why Washington is afraid that Taiwan will create excuses for China to invade the island, and why Washington, despite the spirit of freedom and democracy that it upheld when the United States was founded, has gone against its judgment of right and wrong and insisted on opposing Taiwan's UN referendum. ... "We are clearly aware that it is not because the Americans have confused right and wrong or reversed good and evil that they decided to oppose Taiwan's UN referendum; they do so because of their realistic consideration. But the United States is, after all, the defender of democracy in the world; given that Taiwan is a new democratic country, the United States really should not abandon its founding ideals of democracy and freedom, tilt toward totalitarian China, and take actions that are unfavorable for Taiwan. In addition, Taiwan's security is closely related to the U.S.'s interests and peace and stability in the Western Pacific. This newspaper hopes that the United States will seriously consider how to support Taiwan's democracy at this critical moment, rather than being the reason that causes Taiwan's democracy to move backward." B) "Pronouncements of Lord Burghardt" The "Free Talks" column in the pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 720,000] wrote (12/13): "The U.S. approach in opposing the UN referendum seemed to have gotten coarser and rasher. Besides the thoughtless comments previously made by U.S. State Department officials, AIT Chairman Raymond Burghardt, during his recent visit to Taiwan, also put on the airs of an imperial envoy from the metropole by 'lecturing [and] admonishing' the incumbent president and two presidential candidates of our country, respectively, and drawing a red line for them. ... "Lord Burghardt also said the UN referendum is unfair to, and will restrict, the new president. Such a remark was truly ridiculous and inappropriate. A referendum represents the highest direct public opinion. If the UN referendum fails to pass, surely it will not be binding for the new president; but if it passes, the new president will have to carry it through, or else he will violate the spirit of democracy. It is unlikely that Burghardt, who comes from an advanced democracy, is unaware of such simple common sense of democracy. It is totally unimaginable that he, instead, requested that the Taiwan public accept such an undemocratic order from the metropole to oppose the UN referendum. "Lord Burghardt added that the United States wants to assure a 'peaceful change of leadership.' Such worries [of the United States] are nothing but the biggest humiliation for Taiwan's democracy. ... The only possibility of a non-peaceful change of leadership to happen is, without a doubt, the result of China's military threats. It would be more appropriate for Washington to worry about China's next step rather than [worry about] Taiwan." C) "The United States Is Eager to Seek a Commitment from Taiwan's New President" Washington correspondent Nadia Tsao said in an analysis in the pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 720,000] (12/12): "It is a widely known fact that the United States is opposed to Taiwan's holding a UN referendum, but it is also a fact that Taiwan has already launched the procedures to hold such a referendum. The real intent behind the United States' recent repeated and open declarations on this issue is to ensure that Ma Ying-jeou and Frank Hsieh will not use the referendum results to further push for writing Taiwan independence into the Constitution or change Taiwan's national title in 2008. In other words, Washington cannot wait to seek a commitment from Taiwan's 'new president.' ..." D) "Does the US Respect Democracy?" The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 300,000] editorialized (12/13): "Taiwan may not have official diplomatic ties with the US, but this shouldn't mean that Taiwan's president, or his successor next year, should be treated with any less respect by US officials. A quick assessment of American Institute in Taiwan Chairman Raymond Burghardt's comments during his visit to Taipei this week demonstrates that the US government still has much to learn about showing respect to the president of a democracy. ... After telling local reporters on Monday that 'all it [the referendum] does is cause trouble,' Burghardt -- in an overtly condescending manner -- told Chen that what the latter had said and done with the referendum could 'harm the new president's ability to get off on the right foot.' He added that the referendum would not only make things difficult for the next president but make things even more complicated if it passes. Just because Taiwan lacks official diplomatic ties with the US and is not recognized as a state by the UN does not give Burghardt license to lecture Chen on what he should and should not do, nor draw red lines for the next president on how he should proceed on cross-strait policy. ... Burghardt said the result of the referendum would not change Washington's 'one China' policy. That's fine, since Taiwan is an independent state with its own territory and currency and a government that is answerable only to Taiwanese. The referendum is not an attempt to influence US policy. The US government has often complained about Chen springing surprises on Washington by making sudden announcements and that the DPP administration has failed to understand US policy. Granted, Chen has a tendency to make extemporaneous remarks that warrant more care. "But beyond that, the lack of official diplomatic links -- and the calisthenics that this situation has forced Taiwanese diplomats to perform just to talk to their US counterparts -- is the principal reason why Taipei hasn't been able to 'get' US policy. Give us direct access and all that ambiguity, all those misunderstandings, will vanish. Taiwan cherishes and takes very seriously its relationship with the US. But by the same token, the US should respect Taiwan and let its elected president do his job -- represent Taiwanese and work for their collective good." E) "U.S. Must Not Insult Taiwan Democracy" The pro-independence, English-language "Taiwan News" [circulation: 20,000] editorialized (12/13): "... However, Burghardt's remarks had no substantive effect in blocking the vote on the initiative, which should take place together with the March 22 presidential poll and a competing referendum sponsored by the opposition Kuomintang on whether to apply for 'readmission' to the U.N. under the name of the Republic of China or other feasible names. ... In combination with Burghardt's statement that the U.S. will not change its 'one-China policy' regardless of the results of the referendum, observers would also be justified in wondering whether the U.S. is trying to create an atmosphere more congenial to opening of negotiations for 'unification or whether these statements indicate that Washington believes that 'unification' is the 'status quo' and, along with the Chinese Communist Party and the KMT, aims to exclude the option of "independence" for the Taiwan people. "After all, if Washington continues to insist on upholding a 'one-China policy,' there will be little room for Taiwan and the PRC to hold discussions about anything else besides how to engage in unification. We therefore believe it is necessary for Washington to clarify whether pushing Taiwan to abandon its current status of a democratic and independent state and unify with the PRC is now official U.S. policy. We also believe the statements by the AIT chairman demanding that President Chen make commitments to ensure 'peaceful transfer of power' constitute grave insults to President Chen, the DPP and all of the Taiwan people who struggled against 38 years of KMT-imposed martial law for democracy and human rights. ... "We acknowledge that the U.S. played an important role in the promotion of Taiwan's democratization and continues to make a huge contribution to the maintenance of Taiwan's security and the stability and security of the Taiwan Strait. However, we urge Washington policy makers to realize that the essence of democracy is to allow the people themselves to face and resolve important issues that affect their lives, interests and rights, a principle that is embodied in the guarantee of the right of self-determination contained in the United Nations covenants on civil and political rights. We do not expect the governments of the United States or any other nation to take a stand for or against any referendum or initiative issue but do expect that a country which styles itself to be the leader of the world democratic camp should respect the right of the citizens of a fellow democracy to make their own decisions. "We frankly find the attempts by the U.S. to pressure our government to illegally cancel this referendum and its transparent attempts to stir up domestic opposition through the use of fear tactics to be both hypocritical and unwise, as the result may well be to create greater danger to Taiwan's political stability and regional security than either of the two U.N. referendums could possibly generate. We urge the U.S. government to follow the example of Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega and respect the democratic and legal right of referendum of the Taiwan people and respect the significance of the result of the two U.N. related referendums as manifestations of the collective will and voice of Taiwan's people." F) "Elephant in the Living Room" Columnist Antonio Chiang noted in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 520,000] (12/12): "A-bian has changed his previously tough attitude of speaking out against the United States and has guaranteed more than once in front of the chairman of AIT that his Four Noes and One Without pledge remains unchanged. It is a pity, however, that he has maxed out his credibility, and none of his pledges is deemed valid. The Americans have come to regard him as a caretaker president and have placed their hope on the next president. Their biggest request for A-bian is that he release his control and give the new president the opportunity to deal with cross-Strait relations. "In fact, the souring of Taipei-Washington relations has done severe damage to Taiwan. All other countries [in the world] look upon and follow the lead of the United States. The White House's mistrust of A-bian has directly affected the international community's attitude toward Taiwan. If the United States decides not to support Taiwan, no other country will. From Japan to Europe, from the APEC to other various international organizations, when the effect [of no support] expands, the damage done to Taiwan will be too great to make up. ..." G) "The United States Has Set the Tone for Taiwan Ahead of Time" Journalist Chiang Hui-chen said in an analysis in the centrist, KMT-leaning "China Times" [circulation: 400,000] (12/12): "Prior to his departure from Taiwan, Raymond Burghardt again slammed Bian's playing with the backdoor referendum as 'causing trouble.' The United States attempted to draw a line between Bian and the Taiwan people to reduce the possible momentum that might be generated by the UN referendum. But what is most important is that Burghardt has smoothly secured commitments from both Ma and Hsieh that they 'will not seek to interpret or elaborate on the results of the referendum in the wake of next year's presidential election!' ... The United States' trust in Bian has dropped to the lowest point, and it has judged that the UN referendum has already burst out of the box of the 'Four Noes.' It therefore dares not look down upon Bian's ability to dictate the upcoming campaigns in the next six months as well as his influence after he steps down. ..." H) "The United States Shows Its Bargaining Chips: Will Not Allow Bian to Do Whatever He Pleases" Journalist Lu De-yun noted in an analysis in the pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 400,000] (12/12): "AIT Chairman Raymond Burghardt has visited Taiwan again [for the second time] in less than six months. Even though his posture as a career diplomat remains the same, it was unusual to see that he did not even bother to hide his mistrust of Taiwan's ruler. Not only did he openly disclose the key points discussed during his meeting with President Chen, but he also directly stated that Bian's UN referendum is a violation of the Four Noes pledge. This was just a showdown in words; without any ruthless remarks, the Americans have disclosed their bargaining chips: We will not let you continue to do what you please. ... "Burghardt has always given high compliments to Taiwan's prosperous democracy and applauded the peaceful transfer of power in 2000 as a valuable achievement. But the intent of the United States that he conveyed during a face-to-face meeting with Bian two days ago was, unexpectedly, to ensure a peaceful change of leadership. This indicated that Washington believes that Taiwan's democracy has regressed, and it does not trust that President Chen is willing to relinquish his power. Being a big country, the United States would not use such words to describe its views toward Chen if it has no sufficient proof in its hands." I) "Admonition from U.S. Shouldn't Go Unheeded" The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" [circulation: 30,000] editorialized (12/13): "... The U.S. government, worried that these measures [i.e. the UN referendum] will aggravate tensions across the Taiwan Strait, has time and again advised President Chen to think twice. ... President Chen and his men obviously believe that the U.N. referendum will influence the upcoming presidential election in favor of the ruling party, for this seems to have been the case during the 2004 presidential poll. Whether this old trick will work again in the upcoming election is anyone's guess. But one thing is quite certain: Relations between Taiwan and the U.S. have suffered due to the DPP government's unyielding attitude on this issue." YOUNG