Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07AITTAIPEI915
2007-04-25 09:48:00
UNCLASSIFIED
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Cable title:  

MEDIA REACTION: U.S. CROSS-STRAIT POLICY

Tags:  OPRC KMDR KPAO TW 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0010
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #0915 1150948
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 250948Z APR 07
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5004
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 6673
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 7924
UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000915 

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: U.S. CROSS-STRAIT POLICY


UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000915

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: U.S. CROSS-STRAIT POLICY



1. Summary: All major Chinese-language dailies in Taiwan gave
significant coverage on April 25 to President Chen Shui-bian's call
Tuesday for a plan to grant sentence commutations to many prison
inmates island-wide. News coverage also focused on the year-end
legislative elections and the 2008 presidential election, and on
Taiwan's 23rd Hang-Kuang military exercise. The pro-status quo
"China Times" ran a banner headline on page five that said "Ministry
of National Defense Confirms for the First Time: Taiwan's Missiles
Are Capable of Launching Counterattacks against Mainland China if
the Island Is under Attack."


2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an editorial in the
pro-independence "Liberty Times" elaborated on an article by John J.
Tkacik, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, which
was carried by the newspaper Monday. The editorial urged the United
States to define clearly the status quo of Taiwan's independent
sovereignty so as to stop China from using force against the island
and to maintain peace in the Taiwan Strait and the West Pacific.
End summary.

"The United States Must Not Adopt a Policy of Strategic Ambiguity
toward the 'Determination of Taiwan's Status Quo' Any More"

The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 500,000]
editorialized (4/25):

"U.S. Heritage Foundation senior research fellow John J. Tkacik said
in a column in this newspaper recently that the United States has
constantly stated that it opposes any change in the status quo of
Taiwan. But the United States has never clearly defined what
Taiwan's status quo is. Tkacik believes that Washington's failure
to give a formal and detailed definition of 'the status quo as we
determine it is akin to ceding its leading role in [defining] the
controversial [status quo] to Beijing and Taipei, and when tension
rises [across the Taiwan Strait], American diplomats can only
respond reactively, in a panic.

"Tkacik therefore suggested that the U.S. government clearly state
its position: Namely, 'the United States neither recognizes nor
accepts [Beijing's claim] that China, based on whatever
international laws there may be, is entitled to use force or
threaten to use force against democratic Taiwan.' Also, 'even if
Taiwan declares independence, it will only be a matter of record,
which will not change the behavior of any country, nor will it have
any impact on China's security situation.' By doing so, it will be
essentially telling China that the United States does not, and has
never, recognized China's claim over Taiwan's territory. ...

"... Tkacik's proposal that the U.S. government clarify the status
quo of Taiwan is aimed at stopping China from using any means,
including the use of force, to alter Taiwan's status quo
unilaterally. In reality, [if] Washington publicly defines Taiwan's
status quo - namely, Taiwan and China are two separate countries -
it will certainly be conducive to regional stability and prevent
China from risking danger in desperation. But still, we believe
that when it comes to the status quo of Taiwan, one must trace back
to its source - an international treaty signed after World War II.
Only by doing so can the truth be revealed and Taiwan's status be
thoroughly understood, and it can thereby shatter China's
self-composed fiction that 'Taiwan is part of China,' ...

"The U.S. government always emphasizes that its one China policy
differs from Beijing's one China principle, and [as a result,]
Washington's [position of] not recognizing that 'Taiwan is part of
China' is self-evident. To define the status quo of Taiwan is not
merely aimed at preventing military conflicts across the Taiwan
Strait but also at fulfilling the spirit that 'all people are
entitled to the right of self-determination' as specified in the
United Nations Charter and the International Human Rights
Convention. The United States might have been able to adopt an
ambiguous strategy regarding the status quo of Taiwan earlier when
China's national strength was relatively weaker. But now given
China's military expansion and its evident aggressiveness, a clear
definition of the status quo of Taiwan's independent sovereignty
will be the most effective or even the only countermeasure for the
United States to stop China from using force against Taiwan and to
maintain peace in the Taiwan Strait and the West Pacific."


YOUNG