VZCZCXYZ0021
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #0644/01 0600844
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 010844Z MAR 06
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8796
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 4768
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 5962

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000644 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - ERIC 
BARBORIAK 
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: PRESIDENT CHEN'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF 
CESSATION OF THE NATIONAL UNIFICATION COUNCIL AND GUIDELINES 
 
 
¶1. Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused 
their coverage March 1 on the aftermath of President Chen 
Shui-bian's announcement Monday that the National 
Unification Council (NUC) will "cease to function" and the 
National Unification Guidelines (NUG) will "cease to apply"; 
and memorial activities held in commemoration of the 
February 28 Incident of 1947.  All papers carried a news 
story on their front or first few pages regarding Chen's 
remarks Tuesday at a February 28 Incident commemorative 
ceremony in which he asked those attending five times 
whether he had done anything wrong in terms of ceasing the 
operations of the NUC.  All papers also reported on the 
State Department's and Beijing's reactions to Chen's 
announcement and the pan-Blue camp's plan to recall Chen. 
It is noteworthy that most Chinese-language papers have 
started to use the word "cease" rather than "abolish" or 
"scrap" in their reports and editorials about Chen's NUC 
announcement. 
 
The pro-unification "United Daily News" ran a new opinion 
survey on its page three which reported that 52 percent of 
those polled said they believe ceasing the functioning of 
the NUC is not conducive for Taiwan with regard to 
maintaining the status quo.  Also, 63 percent of the 
respondents said they don't believe that Chen has no 
intention to change the status quo.  The poll also found 
Chen's approval rating at 25 percent, but 47 percent of 
those polled said they don't support the plan to recall Chen 
over his decision on the NUC. 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, the "Free Talk' 
column in the pro-independence "Liberty Times," Taiwan's 
biggest daily, and an editorial in the limited-circulated, 
pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" both 
welcomed Chen's decision and said he is moving in the right 
direction.  An editorial in the pro-status quo "China Times" 
and an editorial in the limited-circulated, conservative, 
pro-unification, English-language "China Post" both called 
Chen the only and biggest winner in the controversy over the 
NUC.  "China Times" Washington correspondent Norman Fu said 
in his "Washington Outlook" column that Washington's 
strategy now is to hold Chen to his pledges.  Professor Chen 
I-hsin of Tamkang University's Graduate Institute of 
American Studies, however, opined in the "China Times" that 
"the United States' compromise with Chen indicates 
Washington's indulgence of Taiwan independence, which was 
just sufficient enough to encourage Chen to open up a [new] 
battlefield for holding a referendum on [Taiwan's] new 
constitution."  End summary. 
 
A) "Taiwan Moving Forward" 
 
The "Free Talk' column in the pro-independence "Liberty 
Times" [circulation: 600,000] said (3/1): 
 
". Following the cessation of the NUC and NUG, to write a 
new constitution to ensure that Taiwan is a normal country 
will be the island's next step.  While [we] show support for 
President Chen's decision to resist both internal and 
external pressure and announce the cessation of the NUC and 
NUG, we also need to express concern about whether the pan- 
Blue camp will use the fourth point on [Taiwan's] 
constitutional reengineering, which Chen announced in his 
seven-point statement at the National Security Council 
meeting [Monday], as an excuse to block [Taiwan's] new 
constitution.  If the pan-Blue camp plans to do so, it will 
be terminated by people like the NUC and NUG [was 
terminated] and become part of history!" 
 
B) "No Cause for Alarm over NUC" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" 
[circulation: 30,000] editorialized (3/1): 
 
"President Chen Shui-bian's announcement that the National 
Unification Council (NUC) will cease to function and the 
Guidelines for National Unification will cease to apply has 
prompted concern in the US, sharp criticism from China and 
plans to impeach Chen in the pan-blue camp.  But all Chen 
has really done is to declare the death of a long inert boy 
and give politics in Taiwan a bit of a shake.  There is no 
need to overreact.  . 
 
"By announcing that the NUC and the guidelines will `cease 
to function,' rather than be `abolished,' Chen has tried to 
achieve a political compromise.  The president has moved in 
the right direction, but the timing is unfortunate.  The 
 
right time to make the announcement would have been during 
his 2000 inauguration." 
 
C) "Only Chen Shui-bian Is the Biggest Winner This Time" 
 
The pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation: 400,000] 
editorialized (3/1): 
 
"President Chen has again [made and] concluded a perfect 
demonstration of [his] `conflict, compromise, move a step 
forward' [operational theory]!  The NUC has `ceased to 
function, and the NUG has `ceased to apply.'  For 
Washington, since the wording that [Chen] used was not so 
strong, it may decide to `accept [the result] 
unenthusiastically despite its displeasure' in the hope that 
the controversy can be put to an end as early as possible. 
As for Chen, he will leave it to Washington to consider the 
English wording and `make its own interpretation,' while 
inside Taiwan, there is no point at all in trying to 
distinguish the semantic or phraseological difference 
between `cease' and `abolish.'  The most important thing is 
that Chen has achieved the strategic purpose he desired by 
successfully adopting the tactics of `moving two steps 
forward, then one step back. .' 
 
"We would like to pose a question: Will there still be the 
`Five No's' pledge?  Chen surely will not talk about it 
again, but will the United States?  . For Chen, he can do it 
ten thousand times if anyone wants him to verbally promise 
that he will `not change the status quo.'  The point is that 
the `Five No's' `Incantation Hoop' [over Chen] has already 
been removed, and all the more, the `Five No's' [pledge] 
disappeared by his simply tearing apart the `last No.'  Is 
this business [with the United States] profitable [for 
Chen]?  Of course!  Without the restraints of the `Five 
No's' pledge, there is now much more room in which Chen can 
manipulate [matters].  Yes, one may say that Chen did make 
many new commitments and pledges.  But if the Five No's 
pledge, which used to be `as firm as a rock,' could be torn 
apart so easily, is there anything else that cannot be 
changed?  As a result, we can be sure that regarding this 
matter, Chen is the biggest winner! 
 
"[If we] look at the other side of the tearing apart of the 
`Five No's' pledge, [we'll see] that Chen has made 
Washington, Beijing and Taipei all pretty busy with `crisis 
management' for him alone for a whole month.  Beijing has 
suppressed [its anger] for the time being and just watches 
how Washington is going to handle it.  But all it sees is 
that Washington was stuck in a dilemma - it could not stop 
Chen, and in the meantime it had scruples about [punishing 
him]; Washington was afraid that it would harm Taiwan if it 
penalized Chen. .  When Chen finally decided to use the word 
`cease' to replace `abolish,' he acted as if he had given 
Washington much face.  During this process, it was the 
United States, not Chen, who had been put on a short leash. 
.  Yes, anyone with a sense of international affairs would 
know that after a whole month's worth of `pushing and 
bumping,' the foundation of mutual trust between the United 
States and Taiwan has been thinned all the more.  But what 
can a big country like the United States do to Chen if he 
has made it very clear that he doesn't care at all [?] . 
 
"Chen started the agenda to `scrap the NUC and NUG,' which 
rescinded his own pledge, jerked Washington-Beijing-Taipei 
[relations] into a state of volatility, forced everyone to 
spin with him, and pushed Taiwan further down into a 
desperate situation.  All the more, he gives Taiwan no 
chance to calm down now to gradually resolve the many 
emergent problems that should have been dealt with long ago. 
We must announce sadly and painfully that in the controversy 
over the `abolition of the NUC and NUG,' which was triggered 
by Chen single-handedly, Chen has won, but Taiwan has lost!" 
 
D) "United States Wants to Hold Bian to His Pledges" 
 
Washington correspondent Norman Fu said in the "Washington 
Outlook" column of the pro-status quo "China Times" 
[circulation: 400,000] (3/1): 
 
". Chen Shui-bian is applying a nibbling approach, or 
`salami tactics' as Westerners term it, to the United States 
in an attempt to achieve his goal of `gobbling' [everything 
he wants].  The situation will get increasingly dangerous, 
and if the United States fails to show its determination [to 
stop Chen], it will end up in a disaster.  This under Chen's 
manipulation, the situation across the Taiwan Strait is 
 
already changing.  When Beijing becomes intolerant [of 
Taiwan] and there is nothing Washington can do, it may very 
likely resort to arms. 
 
"Washington and Beijing originally have had a tacit 
agreement that the cross-Strait issue is not a top priority 
between them and it can be `put on the back turner.'  Now 
that A-bian triggered the controversy of the abolition of 
the NUC and NUG, the issue will surely be the focus of U.S. 
President George W. Bush's meeting with Chinese President Hu 
Jintao when the latter visits Washington in April.  Such a 
development is unfavorable for Washington, Beijing and 
Taipei.  The only one who is benefited from the process is 
Chen, but [the benefits he got] will be transient.  In the 
end, Bian will be even less important than a droplet in the 
big waves of history; he will be nothing more than a 
"footnote" at best." 
 
E) "[Chen] Takes off His Mask and Is Ready to Push for 
[Taiwan's] New Constitution?" 
 
Professor Chen I-hsin of Tamkang University's Graduate 
Institute of American Studies opined in the pro-status quo 
"China Times" [circulation: 400,000] (2/28): 
 
". The question is that this controversy [over Chen's 
decision to cease the functioning of the NUC] did not die 
down because of Chen's announcement.  The United States' 
compromise with Chen indicates Washington's indulgence of 
Taiwan independence, which was just sufficient enough to 
encourage Chen to open up a [new] battlefield for holding a 
referendum on [Taiwan's] new constitution. . 
 
"Even though Washington sent out its last diplomatic message 
[to Taipei], Chen just played with words and fooled the 
United States.  [Chen's move] gave people a deep feeling 
that the United States' superpower position is declining, 
and it is expected that Washington's prestige in Asia will 
be seriously damaged. .  Chen will naturally become a leader 
of Taiwan independence after he has successfully passed a 
critical test this time by playing with words.  All the DPP 
candidates who plan to engage in elections will either bow 
to Chen now or copy his tricks in the future.  But should 
there be any instability in Taiwan society, across the 
Taiwan Strait, or even in the Asia-Pacific region in the 
future, it will likely be the result of the misfortune 
caused by Washington's indulgence of Chen." 
 
F) "Chen Scores Victory, but at the Cost of His Image" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China 
Post" [circulation: 30,000] said in an editorial (3/1): 
 
". Chen's diplomatic victory clearly was a major setback for 
Washington's policy on Taiwan.  The Bush administration had 
tried almost all possible means to persuade Chen not to 
abolish the guidelines ever since he first revealed his 
intention early last month to do so. .  That Chen dared to 
say no to Washington this time was a calculated move. 
First, U.S. support is no longer of great importance to him 
at a time when he has only two years left before leaving 
office.  What is more, he knew that Taiwan is so important 
strategically that the U.S. cannot afford to give up this 
island just because of differences in a single policy area. 
. Policy makers there may find it necessary to consider some 
new policy measures to prevent Chen from pursuing political 
changes unilaterally.  The U.S., while reluctant to see 
Taiwan leaning toward Beijing politically, is unwilling to 
see it pushing for formal independent either.  They believe 
that a Taiwan maintaining its present political standing is 
in the best interests of the U.S. ." 
 
KEEGAN