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

110808Z Jul 05

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 TAIPEI 002975 
 
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: GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM, G-8 
SUMMIT 
 
 
Summary: While the major Taipei dailies quickly shifted 
their news coverage from the blasts in London back to 
local politics July 9-11, several newspapers 
nonetheless continued to editorialize on the global war 
on terrorism as well as its connection to the G-8 
Summit.  A centrist "China Times" editorial said last 
Thursday's terrorist attacks in London will re-direct 
the discussion of global issues in the G-8 summit; in 
addition, the editorial said it is necessary to review 
the U.S.-led war on terrorism.  A separate "China 
Times" commentary noted that both the United States and 
Britain claim that they have been playing the role of 
"liberator" in the Islamic world over the past three 
years, but in reality, they are acting as powerful 
"suppressors."  A pro-unification "United Daily News" 
editorial called on the United States and Britain to 
review the sources of clashes between civilizations and 
ethnic confrontations so as to prevent having innocent 
people all over the world suffer the consequences of 
their unilateral actions.  An editorial in the limited- 
circulation, conservative, pro-unification, English- 
language "China Post" weighed in on the topic of the G- 
8 Summit by saying with mainland China and India 
missing, the meeting was in essence devoid of substance 
and achievement.  End summary. 
 
¶1. Global War on Terrorism 
 
A) "Terrorist Attacks in London Will Re-direct the 
[Discussion of] Global Issues" 
 
The centrist, pro-status quo "China Times" 
[circulation: 600,000] editorialized (7/9): 
 
". In the wake of [last Thursday's] terrorist blasts in 
London, the G-8 Summit, whose focus originally fell on 
Africa and environmental issues, will inevitably move 
toward a discussion of anti-terrorism issues. 
Terrorism is indeed the most serious issue in the 
international community, but the ways currently 
employed to handle it, as represented by the United 
States, have already proven to be full of drawbacks and 
thus definitely need to be reviewed. . 
 
"Nonetheless, since the September 11 terrorist attacks 
happened in New York, the threats posed by terrorism to 
human beings have entered a new stage.  The blasts in 
London on July 7 were in fact a new turning point that 
causes the public to realize that they need [new] anti- 
terrorism policies that can better cope with terrorism. 
But where [to find these new policies] and what the new 
policies are -- is after all a common challenge that 
the world must face together, including Taiwan." 
 
B) "Terrorists under Every Rock" 
 
Commentator Nan Fang Shuo noted in the "Weekly Review" 
column of the centrist, pro-status quo "China Times" 
[circulation: 600,000] (7/11): 
 
". As a result, the focus of the United States' and 
Britain's war on terrorism, as well as those means 
adopted to fight terrorism over the past three years, 
have now come to a stage that can hardly continue. 
Over the past three years, the war on terrorism [headed 
by the United States and Britain] has mainly relied on 
using military forces, suppressive rule of terror, and 
global monitoring and surveillance, [and] even torture 
to exact confessions, in the hope to subdue the Islamic 
world.  But now, the `liberators,' the roles that the 
United States and Britain claim that they have been 
playing, is in reality more powerful `suppressors.' 
The U.S. military occupied Afghanistan and Iraq and did 
whatever pleased them.  It has arrested some 65,000 
people there just in order to suppress them and obtain 
anti-terrorism intelligence.  The most serious problem 
is the prisoner abuse case that has yet to be 
concluded.  `Amnesty International' Director William 
Schulz has thus clearly criticized the case as a new 
type of `Gulag Archipelago. .' 
 
"The war on terrorism has now entered an anti-reversion 
stage.  The public views in the United States, Europe 
and the world are changing fast.  The wars of 
resistance in Afghanistan and Iraq are getting more 
active, and many Islamic international soldiers have 
crossed the borders to join the war [against the 
coalition forces] and have brought along with them new 
combat technology.  The war on terrorism has, after a 
period of time . moved from the edge to the center. 
 
"In the beginning of the war on terrorism, the United 
States and Britain, to create a sense of crisis and to 
publicize their actions, invented a slogan that said 
`There are terrorists under every rock.'  But after 
three years, [it seems] there are more and more 
terrorists.  The blasts in London seem to indicate that 
the slogan has become a reality, and London is a 
starting point of this `self-fulfilling prophesy.'" 
 
C) "Revenges of Terrorism and War on Terrorism" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification "United Daily News" 
[circulation: 600,000] commented in an editorial (7/9): 
 
". In the wake of the September 11 incident that took 
place four years ago, almost the entire world joined 
together to echo and participate in the U.S.-led war on 
terrorism.  But the 9-11 incident dealt a serious blow 
to the United States' `centralism,' and the various 
militarily expansive movements conducted by the Bush 
administration afterwards in an attempt to play the 
role of leader of the world's fight against terrorism 
have been viewed as an unscrupulous demonstration of 
U.S. hegemonic power.  In the face of the 
confrontations between superpowers like the United 
States and Britain and the Islamic world, the 
international community has gradually responded with 
different interpretations and public views.  Over the 
past four years, the United States have moved from the 
role of a victim of the 9-11 incident to a country 
whose international image is deteriorating.  The United 
States' wars against Afghanistan and Iraq are neither 
justifiable nor convincingly reasonable, and they have 
failed to win strong support from even Americans. . 
 
"When the United States and Britain review the reasons 
why their anti-terrorism strategies have failed, 
perhaps they should also reflect on the sources of 
clashes between civilizations and ethnic confrontations 
so as to prevent having innocent people all over the 
world jointly suffer the consequences of unilateral 
actions of the bigger countries." 
 
¶2. G-8 Summit 
 
"G-8 in Transition" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language 
"China Post" [circulation: 30,000] editorialized (7/9): 
 
". So, the G-8 is changing in nature and substance. 
There's nothing wrong about the change, because the 
high-level gathering should discuss urgent matters 
facing the world today.  It should be the stage of the 
world's most important players. 
 
"But something is missing.  Mainland China, the world's 
most populous nation and the seventh largest economy, 
is absent.  So is India, an emerging economy and the 
world's second most populous country.  The former 
wields clout - political, military, economic - second 
only to the United States.  Any discussion at the 
summit on economic and political issues would not make 
practical sense without mainland China participating. . 
 
"So, this week's G-8 summit was devoid of substance. 
The meeting, in which the mainland watched on 
sidelines, achieved little, as usual." 
 
KEEGAN