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

060854Z Sep 05

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TAIPEI 003674 
 
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: CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS 
 
 
¶1.  Summary: Major Chinese-language Taipei dailies focused 
their coverage September 3 - 6 on Council of Labor Affairs 
Chairwoman Chen Chu's attempt to resign from her current 
position, and efforts to secure the release of crewmen 
aboard three Taiwan fishing boats being detained by Somali 
militias. 
 
¶2.  In terms of editorials and commentaries, an editorial in 
the "China Times" said it is evident that recognizing 
Chinese mainland academic qualifications should not be 
viewed as a government issue for democratic Taiwan.  "Taiwan 
Daily," on the other hand, ran an editorial that argued that 
the matter involves not only Taiwan's sovereignty, but 
national identity as well. 
 
¶3.  The pro-independence "Taiwan Daily" said in its 
editorial that KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou proposal for a 
`Direct Link Timetable' shows that he is intent on appeasing 
China.  The pro-independence "Liberty Times" editorialized 
that Ma dreams about cross-Strait peace but has no plans to 
defend Taiwan.  The pro-status quo, English-Language "China 
Post" ran an editorial that stated Taiwan needs arms to 
deter China from attacking the island. 
 
¶4.  The "Liberty Times" editorialized that China cannot 
prove to the world that the country is seeking peace while 
the country has deployed more than 700 missiles aimed at 
Taiwan.  The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei 
Times" said in its editorial that China should first remove 
these missiles in order to seek peace across the Taiwan 
Strait.  End summary. 
 
¶1.  "Does the President Need to Deal With China's Academic 
Qualifications" 
 
The centrist, pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation: 
400,000] editorialized (09/06) that: 
 
"For years, DPP and TSU political figures have said they 
don't want any contact with China.  Consequently, they don't 
intend to recognize Chinese academic qualifications.  But 
what are the consequences?  Maybe they have never figured 
this out?  In fact, whether the authorities recognize 
Chinese academic qualifications or not will influence only 
the public sector, but not the private one. ." 
 
". [T]he United States has the most first-rate higher 
educational system in the world, and the U.S. government has 
never attempted to `recognize' diplomas.  It is evident that 
recognizing academic qualifications is not a necessary duty 
for a democratic country, and there is no need to have a 
president speak in a threatening way at the front line. ." 
 
¶2.  "Based on the Insistence of National Sovereignty and 
National Identity [of Taiwan], China's Academic 
Qualifications Should Not Get Recognized" 
 
The pro-independence, "Taiwan Daily" [circulation: 100,000] 
carried in its editorial (09/06) that: 
 
" . [I]f the government recognizes China's academic 
qualifications, it involves a deeper issue concerning 
national identity, and not merely [the issue of] the 
survival of Taiwan universities. . 
 
" . [I]n China, universities are ideological state machines, 
which lack in the space for liberal thoughts and independent 
judgments.  Regarding the issue of unification or 
independence, China would not allow [in its schools any] 
opinions that would lead to secession from China.  Taiwan 
students who study in China have to accept the ordinary 
professionalism as well as the brain-washing education 
featuring `Chinese nationalism.' . 
 
"Moreover, China has greatly loosened the criteria of 
enrollment in recent years for the necessity of `United 
Front' tactics to attract Taiwan students and Taiwan 
businessmen's children. . This has jeopardized the 
credibility of Chinese academic qualifications. ." 
 
¶3.  "Ma Ying-jeou's Proposal of `Direct Link Timetable' 
Demonstrates He Is Appeasing China and Not Putting Taiwan 
Sovereignty and the People's Interest First" 
 
The pro-independence, "Taiwan Daily" [circulation: 100,000] 
said in its editorial (9/4) that: 
 
". The fact that Ma Ying-jeou chose foreign media to 
publicly announce the KMT's `timetable for cross-Strait 
exchanges' highlights that Ma is full of ambition toward the 
2008 presidential election.  It also shows that the Pan-Blue 
Camp has turned its China policy into substantive moves. 
That is why the `cross-Strait timetable' has been set.  Ma 
Ying-jeou's proposal will result in Taiwan's restraining 
itself and losing its bargaining chips.  Such an 
announcement of `peace by surrender' will certainly make 
China very happy.  But it is disadvantageous for Taiwan's 
sustainable development.  Taiwan will lose all its favorable 
conditions for negotiations.  We believe that the people of 
Taiwan will not accept this. ." 
 
¶4. "The Question Being Which Side Is Chairman Ma Taking?" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 600,000] 
noted in its editorial (9/5): 
 
". Some time ago, there were people who promoted the theory 
that `cross-Strait peace would relieve people from military 
services.'  Now, according to [KMT] Chairman Ma [Ying- 
jeou]'s thinking, there seems to be the implication that 
`cross-Strait peace would relieve Taiwan from military 
purchases.'  Although cross-Strait peace is not a bad thing, 
has China ever promised not to resort to military forces 
against Taiwan?  Would China be willing to recognize Taiwan 
as a sovereign nation?  If Lien Chan's being [brainwashed] 
of unification during his visit to China can be seen as 
greatly reducing hostility, then there will be hardly any 
difference between that kind of cross-Strait peace and 
Taiwan's surrendering.." 
 
¶5. "China's Rise Is Inevitable, Taiwan's Absorption Is Not" 
 
The status-quo, English-language "China Post" [circulation: 
30,000] editorialized (09/06) that: 
 
". It is unrealistic to think that Taiwan can match the 
military opening of a rising superpower, but it can deter an 
attack - deterrence is the prime aim of military power, 
rather than to winning a directory victory.  For this 
reason, those in power - both the ruling party and the 
opposition - should consider carefully their attitude to 
offers by the United States of military equipment to boost 
the deterrent value of Taiwan's military forces.  Many 
observers outside of Taiwan are convinced that the `Pan- 
Blue' camp is simply playing politics of the worst sort in 
its opposition to the purchase of military equipment from 
the United States.  Saying that China will never attack 
Taiwan is a delusion.  Making an attack too expensive to 
contemplate will effectively deter China's use of military 
power against Taiwan. 
 
"The rise of China's power is inevitable, but Taiwan's 
absorption by the communist power is not." 
 
¶6.  "The White Paper That Is Like a Liar's Words" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 600,000] 
editorialized (9/3): 
 
". For Taiwan, the [recent Chinese military] White Paper is 
like an open book of lies.  A democratic Taiwan means no 
threat to Communist China at all.  Yet China has deployed 
700 missiles against Taiwan across the Strait.  If this is 
called `no intention of hegemony,' are the people of Taiwan 
not being making fun of?  What's more, Taiwan's seeking [to 
build] its missile defense is nothing but to try to humbly 
protecting itself under the missile intimidation [from 
China].  However, China is working on the United States to 
try to block Taiwan's building its minimum self-defense 
capability.  The United States, of course, will not buy it. 
Not only did the United States and Japan include the 
stability of the Taiwan Strait as one of the goals of common 
concern in early 2005, but the United States will not agree 
with the White Paper, which puts Taiwan into China's 
exclusive domain.." 
 
¶7. "China's Credibility Gap" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" 
[circulation: 30,000] carried in its editorial (09/06) that: 
 
"Ahead of Chinese President Hu Jintao's expected visit to 
the US, Beijing has issued a white paper entitled Endeavors 
for Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-Proliferation. The 
paper points out that the Taiwan question involves China's 
core interests, and that action by the US to provide help or 
protection to Taiwan would `erode trust between big powers.' 
. 
 
". Taiwan is not a threat to the Chinese Communist Party, 
but this has not prevented Beijing from targeting over 700 
missiles at it.  This totally contradicts the white paper's 
assertion that `China will never seek hegemony or be the 
first to use nuclear weapons.' 
 
"Taiwan naturally needs to seek missile defense, as this is 
a legitimate matter of self-defense.  Rather than putting so 
much effort into obstructing Taiwan's inclusion under a 
missile defense umbrella, China should simply remove the 
missiles targeting Taiwan and declare the Taiwan Strait a 
demilitarized zone.  This would be a way of proving that it 
wants to resolve the cross-strait issue peacefully. 
 
"If China seeks a peaceful resolution to the cross-strait 
issue, all the countries of the world will see that China 
indeed is not seeking hegemony, and that its rise is indeed 
peaceful." 
 
KEEGAN