MEDIA REACTION: U.S. BEEF IMPORTS

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000035 SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/P, EAP/PD - THOMAS HAMM DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S. BEEF IMPORTS ¶1. Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news coverage January 8 on the proposed referendum on the import of U.S. beef products, which passed the initial review by the Referendum Review Committee of the Executive Yuan Thursday and will be able to enter the second stage of the referendum process; on U.S. arms sales to Taiwan; and on Saturday's legislative by-elections. The pro-independence "Liberty Times" carried a news story on page two with a headline reading "Consumers' Foundation: Taiwan [Holding a] Referendum to Fully Convince the United States [of the Island's Public Opinion]." The pro-unification "United Daily News," on the other hand, ran a banner headline on page six, reading "Taiwan and the United States Reach a Deadlock as to Whether [Both Sides] Will Renegotiate [a Deal] on U.S. Beef." ¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, a column in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" said now that the amendments to the Act Governing Food Sanitation have passed, it is time to call a halt to the referendum on U.S. beef. An editorial in the KMT-leaning "China Times" also chimed in by saying that there is no need nor urgency now to hold a referendum on U.S. beef. A "United Daily News" column called on President Ma Ying-jeou to acquire the skills for effective communication in the wake of the storm over U.S. beef imports. An editorial in the pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" called the legislature's move to ban imports of certain U.S. beef products the biggest setback for Ma. End summary. A) "Time to Halt the Anti-U.S. Beef Referendum" Jaw Shao-kong, a radio program host, wrote in his column in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 520,000] (1/8): "The Legislative Yuan (LY) passed the third reading of the amendments to the 'Act Governing Food Sanitation,' rejecting the Taiwan-U.S. beef protocol, banning the import of ground beef, beef offal, skulls, brains, eyes and spinal cord, and only allowing the import of bone-in beef. The LY also passed a strict supplementary resolution: 'Imports of beef and related beef products from cattle more than 30 months old must be banned; the government should impose strict inspections to ensure that only beef and related beef products from cattle less than 30 months of age are allowed to be imported.' The regulations [in the revised Act Governing Food Sanitation] are very clearly now and thus should be able to dispel the people's doubts and fears about contracting mad cow disease. The referendum initiated by the Consumers' Foundation opposing [the import of] U.S. beef should come to a halt. ... "... 'Referenda' are a double-edged sword; since the results sought by the anti-U.S. beef referendum [advocates] have been achieved, the sword should be put away now, because referenda have a high threshold and are thus not easy to pass, and the society will put a lot of manpower and money into holding a referendum. ... Just in case the [anti-U.S. beef] referendum should fail to pass, it will be a major setback -- and an unnecessary one -- for the Consumers' Foundation and for the anti-U.S. beef [campaign]. The Consumers' Foundation thus should prudently ponder [its next move]. ..." B) "[Political] Credits that Ma Ying-jeou Needs to Earn" Journalist Lee Ming-shien wrote in the "United Notes" column in the pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 400,000] (1/8): "Judging from the softening tone in Washington's latest statement, it is obvious that the Ma administration's conciliation with the United States has proven effective. The amendment to the law concerning U.S. beef has brought about a storm in [Taiwan's] internal affairs and foreign relations. Having concluded his foreign-related parleys, Ma should turn around to clean up the domestic battlefield now. ... "Frankly speaking, effective communication has always been the Achilles heel of the Ma administration, and the amendment to the law concerning U.S. beef has helped to expose it all the more.... In the wake of the amendment, the storm over U.S. beef is yet to subside. The proposed referendum, now entering the second stage of the signature-collecting process, will remain the focus for the next round of political attack and defense. It will have repercussions on future political developments, the upcoming legislative by-elections, and the [year-end] five major city and county [magistrate] elections, and will continue to be a source for ferment...." C) "The Referendum on U.S. Beef Is Not Necessary Nor Pressing" The KMT-leaning "China Times" [circulation: 120,000] editorialized (1/8): "... The content of the referendum proposed by the Consumers' Foundation on U.S. beef is: "Requesting that a Department of Health policy to open [Taiwan's market to] U.S. bone-in beef, ground beef, beef offal and beef spinal cord from cattle less than 30 months of age starting in November, 2009, be retracted, and that the negotiations over the protocol on U.S. beef imports to Taiwan be renewed.' Judging from the proposed [referendum] text, the agenda calling for a referendum is nearly non-existent following the Legislative Yuan's passing of the third reading of the amendments to the Act Governing Food Sanitation. ... "Additionally, the United States has issued a strongly-worded statement [to Taiwan] that the amendment to [Taiwan's] domestic law violated the contents of the Taiwan-U.S. [beef] protocol. As a result, the government has immediately embarked on diplomatic efforts to make up [for its disagreement with the United States]. More importantly, relevant negotiations must be started again. The goal of the economic, trade and national security departments is to resume negotiations [with the United States] right away. Even though Washington is now having a fit of temper and is not willing to open its door for talks for the time being, the protocol stipulated that consultations shall be held three months from now. In other words, shortly following the Consumers' Foundation starting its second stage of signature collecting, the talks to be conducted by the government agencies [with the United States] will have just begun. Also, since the risky parts of U.S. beef that have been banned from being imported only account for a tiny share of the output value, judging from the United States' unilateral interests, there is no reason [that Washington] will procrastinate over the renegotiation. It is likely that Taiwan and the United States will reach a new protocol even before the second stage for the referendum process is finished. Will we still need a referendum? "To put it in a more concrete way, even if the referendum proposal passes the threshold for the second stage and were truly held, it will be extremely difficult to win the approval of more than one half of all the [Taiwan] citizens, as required by the Referendum Law. Given that the chances for the referendum to be rejected are much higher than it will be passed, does it mean that we will approve the significant opening of Taiwan's market to U.S. beef should the referendum be rejected? "The referendum on U.S. beef is an issue concerning the people's livelihood, and a very complicated one. Because it involves negotiations between [two] countries, the United States strongly disapproved of the Legislative Yuan's amendment to the Act Governing Food Sanitation and said bluntly that Taiwan lacks credibility. Given such a precedent, plus the referendum, it will put Taiwan in a very unfavorable position if it wants to negotiate any deals with other countries, and it will have severe repercussions on Taiwan's international image as well. ..." D) "First It Was US Beef, then an ECFA" The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 30,000] editorialized (1/8): "President Ma Ying-jeou endured possibly the biggest setback of his political career on Tuesday when, after months of to-ing and fro-ing, the legislature finally came around to re-imposing restrictions on certain US beef products. Not only was the move a slap in the face for the executive -- which had negotiated the deal with the US -- it was also a severe blow for Ma as Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman. KMT legislators put on a show of defiance in passing the amendment, while also laying down the law for the executive on future handling of beef imports. The reversal not only humiliated Ma, but also made him look weaker than ever. ... "While lack of communication is partly responsible for the current shambles, the biggest objection for most people was the manner in which the protocol was negotiated. In striking the deal in secret, the government ignored the possibility of negative public reaction, seeming only to be concerned about what it could get in return from the US for lifting the ban. Washington had been stalling on several issues to get the ban lifted, but to fail to take into consideration the reaction of the public and the legislature was a fatal miscalculation. Ma cannot blame legislators for this, as they were only bowing to pressure from the public, who remain ill-informed about the safety of US beef. It was the government's task to ensure people were informed before they announced the protocol, not negotiate the deal behind closed doors and try to explain away any fears after more US beef was allowed to enter the market. The failure to translate the protocol into Chinese was another big mistake as this left many feeling that the government had something to hide. ..." STANTON