This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TAIPEI 001137 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/RSP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - 
ROBERT PALLADINO 
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: CHINA'S ANTI-SECESSION LAW 
 
¶1. Summary: Leading newspapers in Taiwan continued 
their coverage March 16 of the impact of China's Anti- 
Secession Law and the U.S. role in the matter, although 
local politics appeared on the front pages of some of 
the newspapers.  All newspapers carried stories 
regarding Taiwan Premier Frank Hsieh's remarks that the 
Chinese law threatens Taiwan with possible war and 
justifies Taiwan holding a referendum on the issue. 
Several newspapers linked the ruling party's plan to 
hold mass demonstration to protest the Anti-Secession 
Law March 26 to hopes that Washington might have some 
message for Taiwan after Secretary of State Condoleezza 
Rice visits Beijing, although some have also made it 
clear that the U.S. reaction to the law so far has not 
been as strong as Taiwan expected.  The headline of a 
page-four news analysis in the conservative, pro- 
unification "United Daily News" reads:  "The United 
States leniently criticizes China. Taipei fails to gain 
upper hand in cross-Strait wrestle."  The pro- 
independence "Taiwan Daily," in a page-two story, said 
the decision to hold mass demonstration March 26 allows 
the Taiwan government sufficient time to gather support 
and to prepare for a big fight with China. 
 
¶2. The pro-independence "Liberty Times" ran an 
editorial again that cautioned the Taiwan people about 
China's attempt to incrementally annex Taiwan, while 
both a commentary in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" 
and an editorial in the limited-circulation, pro- 
independence (English-language) "Taipei Times" chose to 
focus on U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's 
upcoming visit to China.  The "Apple Daily" commentary 
said Taiwan is waiting to see what Secretary of State 
Condoleezza Rice will say to Beijing regarding the Anti- 
Secession Law when she visits, and the "Taipei Times" 
editorial expressed the hope that Rice will see through 
Beijing's two-faced strategy and discern the true face 
of China.  The pro-unification "United Daily News," on 
the other hand, questioned President Chen Shui-bian's 
purpose in joining the mass rally scheduled for March 
26 to protest China's anti-secession law, while the pro- 
unification, limited-circulation (English-language) 
"China Post" editorial urged Chen to step back from his 
position of supporting Taiwan independence and to 
embrace the concept of one China.  End summary. 
 
A) "The Ruling and Opposition Parties Should Be 
Vigilant Against China's Incremental and Imperceptible 
Annexation of Taiwan" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 
800,000] editorialized (3/16): 
 
". Taiwan and China have been two independent sovereign 
nations, which do not belong to each other.  Their 
interactions will only be restrained by international 
law and bilateral treaties.  The internal law of any 
one side cannot interfere with the internal affairs of 
the other.  Therefore, China's enactment of the Anti- 
Secession Law can only satisfy its internal nationalism 
and hawkish sentiments. The law can never be applied to 
Taiwan.  Frankly speaking, China has always had the 
ambition to annex Taiwan.  Its threat to Taiwan will 
absolutely not increase or decrease because of the Anti- 
Secession Law.  Whether it will use military force 
against Taiwan also depends on its capabilities and 
strength, not on the existence of a legal basis. 
Consequently, although the people of Taiwan are 
extremely disgusted with the law and will certainly not 
accept such brutal and savage treatment of Taiwan by 
China, and Taiwan should remain vigilant about China's 
threat, there is no need to be scared.  Should the 
whole nation fall into extreme nervousness, it would 
very easily lead to popular anxiety and confusion.  For 
example, an internal struggle between the ruling and 
opposition parties will give the enemy a good chance to 
exploit [weakness].  That is why the ruling and 
opposition parties must have a common understanding of 
this and together speak out to the international 
community so that the whole world will know the true 
anti-aggression and anti-annexation wishes of the 
Taiwan people. ." 
 
B) "Is the United States a Mediator Between the Two 
Sides of the Taiwan Strait?" 
 
Antonio Chiang, former deputy secretary-general of 
Taiwan's National Security Council, commented in the 
mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 500,000] 
(3/16): 
 
". The United States is getting more and more involved 
in the disputes between the two sides of the Taiwan 
Strait, and its role is more than that of a proactive 
third party [and] has almost reached the level of that 
of a prestigious senior.  Over the past three years, 
subtle changes have occurred in the triangular 
relationship between Taipei, Washington and Beijing. 
Both sides of the Taiwan Strait want to discuss cross- 
Strait disputes with Washington, and Washington 
negotiates with both sides in an attempt to prevent 
tensions from escalating in the Taiwan Strait. 
 
"But the chief requirement for being a `prestigious 
senior' is impartiality.  As an arbitrator, one must at 
least maintain an image of being unbiased on the 
surface, or one will fail in the role.  If Washington 
fails to adopt certain measures or place certain 
pressure on China [regarding the anti-secession law], 
it will lose its credibility and the trust of Taiwan. 
Taiwan is waiting to see what U.S. Secretary of State 
Condoleezza Rice will say to Beijing when she visits 
China.  During this period of time [prior to Rice's 
trip], fervent public opinion demonstrated by Taiwan's 
society can strengthen the bargaining chips to be used 
by Rice when negotiating with China. . 
 
"In addition to being a mediator, arbitrator or a 
balancer in the cross-Strait relations, the United 
States is also a manipulator, and its final aim is not 
[focused on] Taiwan's democracy but on the United 
States' own interests.  This is a fact that we must not 
forget." 
 
C) "Rice Should See China's True Face" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" 
[circulation: 30,000] noted in an editorial (3/16): 
 
". We hope that on her trip through Asia, [U.S. 
Secretary of State Condoleezza] Rice will discern the 
 
SIPDIS 
true face of China's communist government.  There are 
some signs this [sic] has already happened.  Why else 
would the US have used unusually strong language in its 
human rights report published on Feb. 28 to condemn 
China's violations, including the use of the US-led war 
on terror as a pretext for brutally suppressing Uygurs 
and Muslims in China's northwestern Xinjiang Province? 
The report points out that in 2003, China imprisoned 
hundreds of thousands of its own people without trial. 
This is evidence that the result of China's growing 
economic prosperity and national power has merely been 
to let a small, corrupt clutch of leaders and their 
families enjoy the fruits of reform and deregulation, 
while the Communist Party's monopoly on power and 
willful disregard for human rights remains unchanged. . 
 
"Rice should see through Beijing's two-faced strategy 
and realize that in China's repressive regime, there is 
no such a thing as an enlightened leader.  They are all 
a bunch of thugs whose paramount interest is to 
preserve the CCP's stranglehold on power.  Beijing's 
autocrats will not risk losing their cherished monopoly 
on power by introducing a democratic electoral system. 
 
"The US State Department used to harbor the wishful 
view that China could be peacefully transformed.  The 
belligerent content of the `anti-secession' law shows 
just how nave and prosperous that idea really is." 
 
D) "To Fight for What? For Whom? To Demonstrate for 
What? For Whom?" 
 
 
The editorial of conservative, pro-unification "United 
Daily News" [circulation: 600,000] commented (3/16): 
 
". President Chen has openly called for a one million- 
person demonstration.  However, whether he will 
personally participate in the demonstration has not 
been decided thus far.  Obviously, even President Chen 
himself is not clear that is it necessary to 
demonstrate and to demonstrate for what and for whom? . 
 
"Therefore, in the face of such a situation, President 
Chen needs to honestly state to the people:  Will 
President [Chen] decide to end the Taiwan independence 
line in order to alleviate the cross-Strait situation? 
Or, the President, while taking necessary steps to 
counter China's advance, will he continue to promote 
this line and is ready to face the anti-independence 
war that China may start under the Anti-secession Law? 
. 
 
"China's legislation of the Anti-secession Law can be 
seen as a major failure of President Chen's promotion 
of Taiwan independence.  So President Chen must first 
make a choice among 1) continuing the Taiwan 
independence line; 2) giving up the independence line; 
3) or overtly giving up but covertly continuing this 
line.  Then he can make up him mind: does he really 
want to join the demonstration and to demonstrate for 
what and for whom?" 
 
E) "Beyond Venting Indignation, Taiwan Must Practice 
Realism" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language 
"China Post" [circulation: 30,000] said in an editorial 
(3/16): 
 
". [W]e must be being [sic] realistic in coping with 
all the possible risks and difficulties likely to be 
brought about by the hostile mainland legislation. . 
Taiwan cannot afford not to live peacefully with a fast 
rising world power living just next door. 
 
"If the anti-secession law indeed poses a crisis for 
Taiwan, it also presents a way for use to turn the 
challenge into an opportunity.  Beyond contemplating 
the military intimidation, Beijing also offers a wide 
range of proposals for reconciliation.  The include 
opening talks to end the state of hostility and 
adopting measures to expand travel, transport service 
and economic exchanges. 
 
"But the reconciliation offer is conditional. 
President Chen Shui-bian must e willing to step back 
from his position of supporting independence and 
instated embrace the concept of one China.  Chen's 
persistent adherence to his ideologically driven stance 
over the last five years of his administration has been 
the stumbling block to the improvement of relations 
with Beijing. 
 
"There is an ancient Chinese saying: He who tied the 
bell on the tiger's neck is the one to untie it. 
President Chen who actually prompted Beijing to enact 
the anti-secession law by his past relentless push for 
a new Constitution and change to sensitive names to 
realize de jure independence must move to defuse the 
risk of war by changing course." 
 
PAAL