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

280807Z Apr 05

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 TAIPEI 001956 
 
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: LIEN CHAN'S CHINA TRIP 
 
 
¶1. Summary:  While the Taipei dailies continued to 
report April 28 on the aftermath of the violent clashes 
that took place at CKS International Airport between 
Pan-Blue and Pan-Green supporters Tuesday when KMT 
Chairman Lien Chan departed for his trip to China, 
newspapers also focused on the meeting scheduled for 
Friday between Lien and Chinese President Hu Jintao in 
Beijing.  The pro-unification "United Daily News" said 
on its front page: "Hu Jintao will meet with Lien Chan 
and will propose to offer a Closer Economic Partnership 
Arrangement [with Taiwan]."  The centrist "China Times" 
carried a banner headline on its page four that read: 
"Lien will fly to Beijing today and will meet with Hu 
Jintao tomorrow."  The sub-headline added: "Peace and 
trade will be the focus of [Lien-Hu] meeting.  It is 
expected that Hu will offer a concrete response to the 
idea of [establishing] a `common market across the 
Taiwan Strait' and will agree to Taiwan's bid to join 
the WHO in a private capacity."  Taiwan's biggest 
daily, the pro-independence "Liberty Times," in the 
meantime carried a news story on its second page that 
quoted President Chen Shui-bian as saying that he hopes 
Beijing will take Taiwan's existence seriously and 
believes that Taiwan and China will move further apart 
if China seeks to play a dual role as both a "mediator" 
and a "punisher." 
 
¶2.  A "Liberty Times" editorial continued its strong 
criticism of Lien's trip and said Lien, when meeting 
with Hu, should fearlessly demand that China destroy 
all its missiles aimed at Taiwan and abolish the Anti- 
Secession Law.  It would be a true journey of peace and 
Lien would be a true follower of Sun Yat-sen if he does 
that, the editorial said; if he does not, the editorial 
said, he is simply a political liar.  A pro-unification 
"United Daily News" editorial, on the other hand, 
called the meeting between Lien and Hu tomorrow a 
critical opportunity that happens only once in a 
lifetime.  The editorial called on both Lien and Hu to 
work and create a "common prospect" for both sides of 
the Taiwan Strait.  An op-ed in the centrist "China 
Times" discussed the U.S. role in cross-Strait 
relations and concluded that the U.S. influence on both 
sides is increasing rather than diminishing.  End 
summary. 
 
A) "[If] Lien Chan Fails to Accomplish [His] Historical 
Achievement, He Will Become a Public Enemy of the 
People on Both Sides of the Taiwan Strait" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 
800,000] editorialized (4/28): 
 
". Lien's mentioning about [KMT founder] Sun Yat-sen's 
will of `peace, striving and saving China' [during his 
China trip] was not only a result of confusion of time 
and place but also of values.  Today, China and Taiwan 
are two separate countries.  Regardless of the question 
whether China needs to be `saved,' it really has 
nothing to do with the Taiwan people even if China 
needs to be saved.  In particular, China is the real 
chief offender that has created the severe situation 
across the Taiwan Strait, and we should first `save 
Taiwan' rather than `save China.'  In other words, how 
to save Taiwan from being intimidated by China's 
dictatorship; how to save Taiwan's economy from being 
dried out by China; how to save Taiwan people's 
democratic and free lives from being sabotaged by 
China, and how to save Taiwan's independent sovereignty 
from being violated by China are the issues that need 
to be resolved as a top priority.  Since Lien touted 
his China trip as a `journey of peace' and he was 
promoting the peaceful will of Sun Yat-sen, he should 
then justly and fearlessly protest to Chinese leader Hu 
Jintao about [Taiwan people's displeasure], demanding 
that China destroy all the missiles that it deployed 
and aimed at Taiwan and abolish the Anti-Secession Law 
which authorized it to use force against Taiwan.  Only 
by doing that can Lien can his trip a real journey of 
peace and himself a true believer of Sun Yat-sen, or he 
is simply a political liar. ." 
 
B) "Tomorrow' Lien-Hu Meeting: Not to Miss this 
Critical Opportunity Once in a Lifetime!" 
 
The pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 
600,000] commented in its editorial (4/28): 
 
". Therefore, for those on both sides of the Taiwan 
Strait who have a mind to [improve cross-Strait 
relations], they must be watchful for the fragile part 
of [KMT Chairman] Lien Chan's China trip despite its 
seemingly glorious appearance.  The difficult part of 
the issue lies in: Taiwan cannot possibly find a way 
out for the island by neglecting mainland China, and 
China cannot resolve the Taiwan issue by adopting the 
measure that would destroy both sides indiscriminately. 
Lien said he hopes he could find a prospect for people 
on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.  What he meant was 
that it must be a prospect for Taiwan and for mainland 
China, or it cannot be called as a `common prospect for 
people of both sides of the Taiwan Strait.' 
 
"During his first two day's trip, Lien seemed to have 
started a very cautious probe.  The Beijing 
authorities, on the other hand, have offered Lien 
positive leeway and response. . 
 
"In an attempt to resolve the `severe impasse' across 
the Taiwan Strait as referred to by Lien, Beijing 
should have greater tolerance while Taiwan should learn 
to be more coherent.  Only this way can both sides of 
the Taiwan Strait build a peaceful and stable framework 
for interactive development.  Lien's probe may be 
implicit but his intention is very clear.  Now it all 
depends how [Chinese President] Hu Jintao will respond 
at his meeting with Lien tomorrow.  Hu's response is 
not addressed to Lien alone, but it also points out a 
common prospect for both sides of the Taiwan Strait." 
 
C) "U.S. Role Remains in Cross-Strait Relations" 
 
Chen Chung-chih, research assistant of Taiwan's 
Prospect Foundation, said in an op-ed in the centrist 
"China Times" [circulation: 600,000] (4/28) 
 
".  For the United States, it has constantly sent out 
signals since last year-end hoping that both sides 
could resume dialogue.  In the face of the stalemated 
cross-Strait relations, Washington believes that the 
best way is to have both sides of the Taiwan Strait 
engage directly in a dialogue.  Thus, [we can say] the 
United States is playing the role as an invisible but 
solid mediator that proactively pushes both sides to 
resume talks. 
 
"But such a role played by the United States started to 
change early this year; namely, even though the ruling 
party [of Taiwan] strongly criticized the opposition 
leaders' trips to China, the State Department still 
clearly indicated a supportive attitude, emphasizing 
that some Taiwan individuals' recent trips to China are 
a positive step.  In other words, the focus of 
Washington's attention lies in how to make Beijing and 
Taipei maintain a channel for dialogue and adopt 
measures that are acceptable for both sides and 
effective for alleviating tensions across the Taiwan 
Strait. 
 
"Thus, once both sides of the Taiwan Strait resume 
dialogue, the United States will no longer stand on the 
front line and will return to its original role of the 
mediator behind the scene.  Washington's gradual hands- 
off attitude was evident in its response to former 
President Lee Teng-hui's recent remarks.  The United 
States clearly turned down an offer by Lee that said 
`the appropriate venue for negotiating cross-Strait 
ties lies is the United States, not Beijing.'  In 
addition, Washington stressed that the best way to 
resolve cross-Strait tension is to resume dialogue 
directly and that the United States welcomes any steps 
that would help achieve such an objective.  Moreover, 
Washington said that it does not rely on the United 
States to solve all these problems. . 
 
". If our government mishandles the opposition leaders' 
trip to China, it will not only miss an excellent 
opportunity to be able to take the initiative in 
improving cross-Strait ties but will also likely spoil 
Washington's hard efforts in pushing for both sides of 
the Taiwan Strait to resume dialogue.  From this, [we 
can say] the United States' influence on both sides of 
the Taiwan Strait is increasing rather than 
diminishing.  How can Taiwan not act carefully [with 
regard to the U.S. role and cross-Strait relations]?" 
 
KEEGAN