MEDIA REACTION: CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS, TIBET

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000550 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: CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS, TIBET ¶1. Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news coverage April 19-21 on President-elect Ma Ying-jeou's cabinet lineup; on the reform of the DPP; and on speculation over the alleged dispatch of U.S. Marines to guard AIT's new office in the future. The pro-independence "Liberty Times" Sunday ran a banner headline on page one that said "Taiwan-United States Relations' Subtle Change; The United States Will Dispatch Marines to Guard AIT." ¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an op-ed in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" suggested that there should be a third party participating in cross-Strait negotiations. An editorial in the conservative, pro-unification English-language daily "China Post" criticized the United States as being overly cautious for allegedly sending three United States aircraft carrier battle groups to patrol the waters off southeast Taiwan. An editorial in the pro-independence "Liberty Times" criticized president-elect Ma Ying-jeou's "wishful thinking" on the "1992 consensus and one China with respective interpretations," saying it will bring new disasters for Taiwan's sovereignty. Another editorial in the "China Post" criticized China, the Dalai Lama, and Western leaders, including United States House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, for their alleged failure properly to handle the Tibet issue, bringing negative consequences to the relay of Olympic torch around the world. End summary. ¶3. Cross-Strait Relations A) "The Cross-Strait Negotiation Must Be a Three-Party Game" Chen I-hsin, a PhD candidate in Economics at the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London, opined in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 520,000] (4/21): "Cross-Strait negotiations certainly are an issue between two governments on both sides across the Taiwan Strait. As long as the United States and Japan intervene, [they] will be counted as butting into Taiwan or China's national sovereignty, which cannot be justified. However, given the special background of cross-Strait circumstances, peaceful cross-Strait negotiations do not themselves to being ratified only between Taipei and Beijing. [Peaceful negotiations] in black and white without international supervision and the promise of the use of force would be in vain, no matter how well designed. This is an innate predicament of cross-Strait relations, which proves that cross-Strait negotiations cannot be a two-party game only, and Taiwan's new policy of 'cross-Strait non-denial" has to receive international recognition. In other words, if a future cross-Strait governance structure cannot be put under a superior structure of the global governance, a game between two mothers fighting for a child without King Solomon's supervision cannot determine for sure that the fake mother will definitely not raise a knife against the innocent child, Taiwan." B) "What Are the Aircraft Career [sic] Battle Groups For?" The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" [circulation: 30,000] (4/21): "So why are the three American naval task forces [the Kitty Hawk, Nimitz and Lincoln aircraft carrier battle groups] staying near Taiwan until the day when [Taiwan's President-elect] Ma [Ying-jeou] will be sworn in as president? Who are they guarding against? "The logical conclusion is that the Americans are afraid President Chen [Shui-bian] may do something extraordinary to prevent Ma's inauguration. Frank Hsieh attacked Ma in a smear campaign for carrying a 'green card,' a certificate of permanent residence in the United States with which the latter might flee Taiwan in case 'something very wrong' occurred across the Strait. Campaigning for Hsieh, Chen declared repeatedly he could not 'transfer power' to a green card holder. The United States wants to ensure a 'peaceful transition of power' in Taiwan. Washington knows Chen is an extraordinary man capable of doing anything to survive his certain trial for corruption. His first lady was indicted for corruption in 2006, charged with borrowing invoices and receipts from relatives and friends to claim an NT$18.4 million [US$607,160] reimbursement from a public fund under her husband's control for the conduct of 'affairs of state.' She is on trial. Chen was not indicted, as Taiwan's president is immune to criminal prosecution, but was regarded as a co-defendant, who will be formally charged on leaving office. The first couple will stand trial together after May 20 and the chances are that they will be both convicted. He is likely to wind up in prison like Chun Do Huan [sic: usual spelling is Chun Doo-hwan], a former president of South Korea. "The Americans are overly cautious. Chen Shui-bian may try, but cannot provoke China into attacking Taiwan to give him an excuse to declare war and stay in office. Nor can he concoct a 'coup d'etat' to remain in power. Taiwan is a democracy where the rule of law prevails. No colonels would listen, when told to lead their troops to overthrow a government. And it is impossible for the couple to flee like Fernando and Imelda Marcos of the Philippines. The Filipino first couple couldn't have fled without the help of Uncle Sam." C) "Taiwan's Sovereignty Is Facing New Disasters" The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 720,000] editorialized (4/21): "... It is thus Ma Ying-jeou's wishful thinking that China has already acknowledged the 1992 consensus and one China with respective interpretations. Given such a situation, Ma's proactive efforts to resume dialogue and talks with China, push for direct transportation [across the Taiwan Strait], allow more Chinese tourists to visit Taiwan, lift the ban on Chinese investments in Taiwan's real estate market and open the exchange of currency between the two sides will only mislead the international community into believing that Taiwan has accepted the 1992 consensus as defined by China. In other words, [the international community] will mistakenly believe that Taiwan has disparaged itself under the one-China principle. "If 'one China with respective interpretations' were true, wouldn't China's enactment of the Anti-Secession Law in 2005 have become an unnecessary move? While China is targeting Taiwan with more than 1000 missiles and seeking to contain Taiwan in the international community using the one-China principle, Ma is still holding great expectations for 'one China with respective interpretations.' [Ma's expectations] are akin to bowing submissively to China and letting it do whatever it wants with Taiwan. China, on the other hand, is using its persistence in the one-China principle in the international community as a pretext and feigning ambiguity in order to wipe out Taiwan's sovereignty one step at a time. ..." ¶4. Tibet "No Gold in Torch Issue" The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" [circulation: 30,000] (4/19): "The Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibet spiritual leader, and Western human rights groups and politicians like Reporters Without Borders and U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, may have erred in their calculation that the public humiliation of China would pressure it into concession at a time when Beijing is all but ready for the Games - a grand international coming out party to showcase the accomplishments it has made in the past 30 years. "While there is no evidence to bear out Beijing's accusation that the Dalai Lama was behind the March 14 riots in Tibet, the 72-year-old monk can hardly wash his hands clean by pretending that he had nothing to do with it, judging from the influence he claims to wield over his followers. The ensuing protests by Tibetans in the West to disrupt the torch relay around the world, with the help of human rights groups everywhere, have effectively tarnished the holy flame, which was running like a fugitive instead of a revered symbol of peace. ... "In all likelihood, talks between Beijing and the Dalai Lama appear out of the question. The Nobel Peace Prize laureate is unlikely to have his dream for a culturally-independent Tibet realized before his reincarnation. In this sense, the Dalai Lama is a loser. Beijing will not forgive him for messing up the party and causing it to lose face. ... "But Beijing is also a loser, and a big one to boot. All of a sudden, it has become the lightning rod of world outrage. But it has only itself to blame for the mess which could have been prevented. As we have pointed out in this space before, brutal force won't solve the unrest in Tibet. Soft power would be more effective. In the end, Beijing may have the consolation that current "crisis" could be a boon because it has made Beijing popular and legitimate as never before. True to the saying that for every cloud there is a silver lining. Beijing's gain, if at all, is pyrrhic at best." YOUNG