VZCZCXYZ0003
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #0704/01 0652329
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 062329Z MAR 06
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8882
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 4796
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 5994

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000704 
 
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: U.S. RESPONSE TO PRESIDENT CHEN'S 
ANNOUNCEMENT OF CESSATION OF THE NATIONAL UNIFICATION 
COUNCIL AND GUIDELINES 
 
 
¶1. Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies gave 
prominent reporting and editorial coverage March 4-6 to the 
U.S. State Department's statement last Friday urging Taiwan 
to unambiguously affirm that its February 27 announcement 
did not abolish the National Unification Council (NUC); 
President Chen Shui-bian's interview with the Japan-based 
"Yomiuri Shimbun" last Friday in which he said it is not 
entirely impossible to push for a referendum for the new 
constitution in 2007; and the year-end Kaohsiung and Taipei 
mayoral races.  Almost all Chinese-language papers reported 
on the State Department's statement on their front pages 
March 4.  The pro-unification "United Daily News" ran a 
banner headline on its second page that read: "'Cessation' 
Is the Bottom Line; If Taiwan Concedes, `the Whole Month's 
Efforts Would Be Wasted.'"  The pro-independence "Liberty 
Times," Taiwan's biggest daily, however, ran a news story on 
its page two with the headline: "Cease the NUC 
[Functioning]?  Abolish the NUC?  James Huang: Taiwan and 
the United States Have No Difference [in Wording]." 
 
Several papers reported March 6 on an opinion survey 
commissioned by the Institute for National Policy Research 
and conducted by the China Credit Information Service Ltd. 
that revealed that 87 percent of the respondents said they 
think Taiwan's future should be decided by the 23 million 
people on the island.  The "United Daily News" spent a whole 
page March 6 reporting on an academic seminar on "Cross- 
Strait Relations and Taiwan's Security in the Wake of the 
Cessation of the NUC and NUG." 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, editorials in 
the pro-independence "Liberty Times," "Taiwan Daily" and 
limited-circulation, English-language "Taipei Times" all 
urged the government to stick to its position in ceasing the 
functioning of the NUC by following mainstream Taiwan public 
opinion.  A commentary in the "Taipei Times" pointed out 
three major benefits for Taiwan brought about by President 
Chen's decision on the NUC.  An "Apple Daily" commentary 
said as long as Chen does not go too far, and enables the 
United States to regain control, then the matter about NUC 
and NUG can be resolved.  Soochow University Political 
Professor Lo Chih-cheng said in an interview with the pro- 
unification "United Daily News" that the State Department's 
statement was aimed at clarifying matters with Beijing, not 
at pressuring Taiwan.  Editorials in the pro-status quo 
"China Times," pro-unification "United Daily News," and 
limited-circulation, pro-unification, English-language 
"China Post" all criticized Chen for making a big mistake 
with the NUC matter and ruining the mutual trust Taiwan has 
with the United States.  A "United Daily News" editorial 
also urged Chen to stop pushing for a referendum on Taiwan's 
new constitution.  A "China Times" editorial said Washington 
and Beijing are engaging in the "co-management" of cross- 
Strait issues for the first time.  End summary. 
 
A) "Taiwan Should Stick to Its Position of [Asserting Its] 
Sovereignty Even When Facing Pressure" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 600,000] 
editorialized (3/4): 
 
". [U.S. State Department Deputy Spokesman Adam] Ereli's 
statement [Friday] was totally unnecessary because our 
government's clarification, including President Chen's seven- 
point statement made publicly following the National 
Security Council meeting Monday, was sufficient enough to 
remove doubts about relevant questions - namely, the 
cessation of the NUC and NUG does not involve any change of 
the status quo and that [we will not allow] Taiwan's status 
quo of democracy, freedom and peace to be unilaterally 
altered.  It is noteworthy that since Ereli is the deputy 
spokesman of the State Department and his statement was 
published in writing on the State Department's web-site, it 
might be a result of China's complaint to the United States 
[about Taiwan], as claimed by Foreign Minister James Huang. 
In other words, perhaps [Ereli's statement] was made by the 
United States in response to China's pestering. . 
 
"What's more important is that even facing severe internal 
and external obstruction, the cessation of the NUC and NUG 
has finally been completed.  The move indicated solidly that 
Taiwan must have its own ideas and insistence with regard to 
issues concerning its own future.  . President Chen has 
suffered great pressure from the United States on his path 
to deepening Taiwan's democracy, including his push for 
holding [the island's first-ever] referendum and the 
 
 
cessation of the NUC and NUG.  Chen's firmness and 
[fearlessness to] endure insults in order to achieve his 
objectives is worth wide support of the Taiwan people. 
Following these two experiences, Taiwan people should 
realize that despite many external obstacles, Taiwan's 
assertion, be it a referendum to determine its own future or 
a move to define the cross-Strait status quo, will be 
realized eventually as long as it sticks to the universal 
values of democracy. ." 
 
B) "Opposition to the Cessation of the NUC and NUG Is Akin 
to Opposition to [Taiwan's] Mainstream Public Opinion" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 600,000] 
asserted (3/6): 
 
". The fact that Taiwan is a democratic country and Taiwan's 
future should be determined by the 23 million Taiwan people 
is an undisputable theorem.  The cessation of the NUC and 
NUG is simply a move to get rid of one layer of the many 
restrictions on Taiwan people, and the other moves, 
including the rectification of Taiwan's name and writing a 
new constitution should, without doubt, be promoted. ." 
 
C) "China and Those Who Take the China Road Stir up Trouble; 
the United States Should Respect Taiwan People's Right of 
Choice and Prevent China from Invading Taiwan" 
 
The pro-independence "Taiwan Daily" [circulation: 100,000] 
editorialized (3/4): 
 
". Immediately following Chen Shui-bian's announcement to 
cease the functioning of the NUC, China started to complain 
to the international community [about Taiwan] and assert 
that `cessation equals abolition.'  The pan-Blue politicians 
and pro-China media outlets also echoed Beijing to smear the 
government efforts to return dignity to Taiwan people by 
saying that `cessation of the NUC equals Taiwan 
independence.'  All [such moves] thus aroused the United 
States' doubts about Taiwan. . 
 
"Taiwan and the United States share common interests in many 
aspects and the two have no evident difference over cross- 
Strait issues.  China's mobilizing the united-front force to 
smear Taiwan is actually aimed at sabotaging the substantive 
interests between Taiwan and United States.  China is really 
targeting the United States when it intends to cope with 
Taiwan.  The deeper China's force gets into Taiwan, the more 
dangerous Taiwan's situation becomes, and the less favorable 
the situation becomes for the United States.  .  Taiwan's 
democracy is founded because of the United States' promotion 
[of democracy]; the United States [thus] has the 
responsibility to protect Taiwan from being invaded by 
China.  As the `world's policeman,' the United States has no 
reason to overlook the Taiwan people's move to pursue their 
legal rights or to push Taiwan to China.  The United States 
should support the Taiwan people in holding [the right to 
determine] their own future, and the cessation of the NUC is 
to preserve the room for choice for the Taiwan people and 
their decedents. . " 
 
D) "[Taiwan] Must Lose No Time in Pushing for the Writing of 
a New Constitution and Rectifying [the Island's] Name, And 
in Protecting Taiwan's Security via `De jure Independence' 
in Order to Prevent China from Attacking Taiwan!" 
 
The pro-independence "Taiwan Daily" [circulation: 100,000] 
said in an editorial (3/5): 
 
". Chen Shui-bian's announcement regarding the cessation of 
the NUC and NUG was aimed at giving back Taiwan people their 
dignity and the opportunity to control their own destiny. . 
To ensure its national security, Taiwan must push for the 
writing of a new constitution and rectifying the island's 
name.  [Taiwan needs to] institute a Taiwan constitution and 
get rid of the ROC constitution.  The relationship between 
Taiwan and China is, legally speaking, a relationship 
between two states, namely, an international relationship. 
Only when being placed under an international framework 
(such as the U.S.-Japan security alliance) can Taiwan be 
protected from China's unreasonable and ruthless demands. . 
To ensure Taiwan's position in the international community, 
the top priority is to get rid of the ROC system, and the 
proactive way [to do so] is to push for the writing of a new 
constitution and rectifying Taiwan's name. ." 
 
 
E) "Don't Ignore Good That Came from End of NUC" 
 
Leou Chia-feng, doctoral candidate in London University's 
department of politics and international studies at the 
School of Oriental and African Studies, said in the pro- 
independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 
30,000] (3/4): 
 
"Prior to the commemoration of the 228 Incident, President 
Chen Shui-bian announced that the National Unification 
Guidelines will cease to apply and that the National 
Unification Council (NUC) would cease to function. However, 
some alarmist pro-unification media outlets, politicians and 
other people in Taiwan launched a series of attacks on Chen 
and against independence without consideration for the 
positive results of Chen's decision. 
 
"First, the most important result of doing away with the NUC 
and its guidelines is that it has forced the Chinese 
Nationalist Party (KMT) to acknowledge that independence can 
be an option for Taiwan's future. Over the decades, the KMT 
has vilified independence to the point where it has become 
tantamount to war, leaving no room for rational debate. 
The KMT ... has also been forced to respond to the pressure 
brought by the debate over the council and its guidelines to 
acknowledge for the first time that the people of Taiwan 
have the right to choose independence. ... 
 
"Second, Chen has created an opportunity to make the US 
fully understand Taiwan's situation and needs. Although the 
US openly opposed the passage of China's "Anti-Secession" 
Law last year, it has not taken any substantive action to 
prevent the cross-strait "status quo" from tilting in 
China's favor, but has sat idly by as Beijing has developed 
its carrot-and-stick approach in dealing with Taiwan.  At 
least Chen's decision to scrap the NUC and its guidelines 
has made the US begin to look at Taiwan's difficulties in 
maintaining the `status quo.' 
 
"Although the US was not very understanding of Chen's 
intentions at first, statements by the State Department 
indicate that Washington is finally beginning to understand 
Chen's decision.  Third, the incident has made Taiwanese 
understand the difference between the green and blue camps' 
cross-strait and diplomatic policies. The pan-blues' 
statements about the abolition of the NUC and its guidelines 
have all along been built on the premise that, so long as 
Taipei acts like a good boy, Beijing and Washington will 
reciprocate with a lollipop.  The pan-green camp, on the 
contrary, believes that absolute obedience will continue to 
blur one's own viewpoint and damage one's own interests. In 
the case of the NUC and its guidelines, reality shows that 
if we dare fight for our interests and engage in pragmatic 
negotiations, we will be able to achieve a lot more. There 
is no need to restrict or confine ourselves. ... We 
certainly should not feel complacent due to the abolition of 
the NUC, for there are indications that before the matter 
was finalized, Washington had put tremendous pressure on 
Taipei. ." 
 
F) "Taiwanese Will Decide for Themselves" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" 
[circulation: 30,000] editorialized (3/5): 
 
"Just what exactly was the action taken by the Taiwan 
government toward the National Unification Guidelines and 
National Unification Council (NUC)? There has been some 
confusion and debate over the past week. Without question, 
the official wording used by the government and President 
Chen Shui-bian was that the guidelines had `ceased to be 
applied' and that the NUC had `ceased to operate.' However, 
in the media and even among the general public, whether 
deliberate or unintentional, the action taken has often been 
simply referred to as "abolished." That this seemingly 
innocent discrepancy in reference was sufficient to invite 
the concern of the US government goes to show how the 
unification-independence issue strikes a raw nerve in many. 
 
"Whatever differences may exist between `abolished' and 
`ceased to operate and apply,' they are at most conceptual. 
Some say that if the guidelines and NUC have been abolished, 
they no longer exist, and therefore unification is no longer 
an option for Taiwan. It should be pointed out that neither 
the NUC nor the guidelines are tangible. Until recently, 
their existence has supposedly not been in doubt. However, 
 
 
has this existence helped Taiwan to move any closer to 
unification? The answer is of course not. 
Regardless of whether Taiwan has moved further away from or 
closer to unification over the past years, that movement had 
nothing to do with the guidelines or the NUC. Instead, the 
popular will of the people of Taiwan remains almost the sole 
determinant. ...  Even if the guidelines and NUC have 
genuinely been `abolished,' unification will remain an 
option -- so long as the Taiwanese want to keep it an 
option. Now that the NUC and guidelines have been confirmed 
as continuing to exist -- except that they now cease to 
apply and cease to operate (since when have they ever 
operated or applied anyway, some may ask) -- does that make 
unification any more plausible than before when they were 
erroneously considered to have been `abolished?'  Better 
still, before and after they ceased to apply and operate, 
was there any difference in terms of the likelihood of 
Taiwan unifying with China? The answers to these questions 
are only too obvious. 
 
G) "The United States Can Eat [i.e. Win Over] Both Sides of 
the Strait" 
 
Columnist Antonio Chiang wrote in the mass-circulation 
"Apple Daily" [circulation: 500,000] (3/6): 
 
"The U.S. Department of State demanded in a strongly-worded 
statement that Taiwan unambiguously state whether the NUC 
still exists.  Chinese leaders also condemned in a stern 
voice Ah-bian's word games at the Chinese People's Political 
Consultative Conference.  Both Washington and Beijing have 
demonstrated a tough attitude.  The situation appears not 
good.  In fact, the real winner may be the United States. . 
 
"The timing and technique of Ah-bian's cessation statement 
has disturbed the Americans and China.  But it may not 
necessarily be in conflict with the U.S. strategic interest. 
As long as Ah-bian does not go too far, can find a way out, 
provide China with an explanation, and enable the United 
States to regain control, then this matter can be resolved. 
. 
 
"This is a false issue whether it is NUC abolishment or 
cessation.  Both U.S.-Taiwan and cross-Strait relations were 
further damaged after Taiwan went through this disturbance. 
Our internal abstract space seems bigger.  But the external 
substantive space will only shrink.  The loss will outweigh 
the gain." 
 
H) "Lo Chih-cheng [Speaks of] Crisis over Cessation of the 
NUC and NUG; [Taiwan Should] Mend Taiwan-U.S. Mutual Trust 
in a Low-Profile Manner" 
 
Journalist Huang Ya-shih wrote following an interview with 
Soochow University Political Professor Lo Chih-cheng in the 
pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 400,000] 
(3/6): 
 
".  The United States' statement regarding the cessation of 
the NUC and NUG [last Friday] was mainly aimed at clarifying 
to Beijing not at pressuring Taiwan.  Washington's move did 
not surprise me, and it will happen again before and after 
the meeting between [U.S. President George W.] Bush and 
[Chinese President] Hu Jintao [slated for April].  But I 
don't think the United States will really ask Taiwan to put 
in writing that `Taiwan did not abolish the NUC and NUG.' 
This move will be like to ask President Chen to commit a 
political suicide.  [We] should not underestimate the United 
States' political wisdom and its understanding of Chinese. . 
 
"Taiwan wanted to `make noise' not to `make trouble' by 
using the issue of cessation of the NUC and NUG.  No one can 
restrain Chen from saying or not saying some things.  But 
now is time for prudence of words and behaviors.  [Chen] has 
[successfully] moved two steps forward and one step back, 
and [no one knows] whether [he] will have to move a few 
steps back soon. ." 
 
I) "How Can a Ruler Lead His People into an Unknown 
Disaster?" 
 
The pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation: 400,000] 
editorialized (3/6): 
 
". That's right, when [speaking of] playing schemes, Uncle 
Sam was defeated this time.  They underestimated the 
 
 
toughness of Bian's administration and were not vigilant 
enough about Taiwan's situation, nor did they have the 
awareness to take any precautions.  Washington first 
accepted unwillingly [Taiwan's] word game of `cease to 
function,' then it got angry when the Taiwan authorities 
trumpeted and boasted about its victorious achievement, 
demanding that Taiwan announce unambiguously that it did not 
abolish the NUC and NUG.  Now the United States has re- 
adjusted its position by insisting that altering any of the 
`Five No's' pledges is to change the status quo; the move is 
actually to see that Chen return to the original framework 
under escort. 
 
"The Americans had no clue of the real situation at all. 
Shouldn't the ruling party have trumpeted loudly?  Well, the 
whole point [of the NUC and NUG issue] is to trumpet loudly! 
In essence, be it abolition or cessation of the NUC and NUG, 
it is a symbolic move.  Will it still be symbolic if the 
move is small and unnoticeable?  The direction of [Chen's] 
road is very clear now.  On the one hand, Chen wants to 
duplicate the victory that he enjoyed when he [successfully] 
tied [Taiwan's first-ever] referendum with the presidential 
election [in 2004], and on the other hand, he wants to 
extend his political influence.  That's why he decided to 
push for the referendum on Taiwan's new constitution, which 
is reminiscent of Taiwan independence, before he steps down, 
to put Taiwan into the severest confrontations between 
independence and unification, and to intensify conflicts 
across the Taiwan Strait, in an attempt to facilitate the 
DPP's chances of winning the presidential election in 2008. 
. Since Chen wants to present a new constitution reminiscent 
of Taiwan independence, he first had to get rid of the 
`incantation hoop' made of the `Five No's' pledge.  When he 
tore apart the last `No,' the other `Four No's' also fell 
apart.  Now Chen can do whatever he wants. . 
 
"For the U.S. policy-making authorities, what matters now no 
longer lies in Chen's credibility but in how to effectively 
remove the fuse of Taiwan independence, or at least not to 
let conflicts rise across the Taiwan Strait.  But the whole 
process of `cessation of the NUC and NUG' this time exposed 
that the United States could be so vulnerable when facing a 
Taiwan leader who doesn't care about anything; perhaps [such 
a revelation] even surprised the United States itself.  If 
the United States failed to stop issues such as the 
abolition of the NUC [this time], what will it do to stop 
something more serious in the future?  The cross-Strait 
issues are of critical importance to the United States' 
national interests.  If Washington continues to view Taiwan 
from its old perspective, it might find the island very 
difficult to deal with in the future. ." 
 
J) "Cheating Both Insiders and Outsiders: Does the DPP Still 
Want to Hold the Joyful Rally for Celebrating the NUC 
Cessation?" 
 
The pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 
400,000] editorialized (3/4): 
 
"Chen Shui-bian has gotten into a big trouble.  The U.S. 
authority has shown its hand to him. . The truth has been 
disclosed: in this `NUC cessation' disturbance, Chen Shui- 
bian and the DPP were, in fact, playing a double game, 
`cheating both insiders and outsiders. .' 
 
"The fact that Chen Shui-bian dared to maneuver the U.S.- 
China-Taiwan triangular relationship in such a manner is 
actually not because of his courage, wittiness, and ability 
to manipulate the global situation.  It is only that he 
believes: the two nuclear powers, the United States and 
China, will unlikely start a world war just because of my 
small word game of `NUC cessation/abolishment,' will they? 
Furthermore, if the United States and China want to punish 
me Chen Shui-bian, the 23 million people of Taiwan will be 
penalized as well!  These ideas of Chen Shui-bian are full 
of opportunism and taking chances.  They are definitely not 
out of bravery, rationality, and strength.  Chen's trickery 
and fabrication has repeatedly proved effective in domestic 
politics.  The Americans were played tricks on during the 
`anti-missile/buy-missile referendum.  However, this time 
when the same trick was played once again in front of the 
Americans, it was obviously like a cart pushed and crashed 
on the wall! 
 
"[One] should never down play the seriousness of the U.S. 
`March 2 statement.'  It can be described as the most 
 
 
personal-directed and the toughest-worded formal written 
document in dozens of years of U.S.-Taiwan interactions. (In 
the past, no such wording was seen even when treaties were 
abolished or diplomatic relations severed.)  The United 
States not only has had different assessment on Chen Shui- 
bian, but also must have had [new] realization about the 
DPP's unpredictability. ." 
 
K) "The Next Step: Chen Shui-bian Should Immediately Stop 
[Promoting] the Referendum on a New Taiwan Constitution" 
 
The pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 
400,000] commented in an editorial (3/6): 
 
"The successful U.S. prevention of Chen Shui-bian's denial 
of the `One Will-not' is just an appetizer.  The main dish 
is that [it] has prevented Chen from moving recklessly 
toward the restricted zone of denying the `Four No's' and 
trying to [have] a `referendum on a new Taiwan constitution' 
by means outside the institutionalized route. . 
 
"If Chen could make a touchdown in scraping the `One Will- 
not,' the next step will naturally be proceeding toward 
scraping the `Four No's.'  Then, [promoting] a `referendum 
on a new Taiwan constitution' would be an open script. 
Therefore, the United States took the opportunity when it 
resolved the `One Will-not' crisis to point to the `Four 
No's'.  The U.S. strategy is to demand Chen publicly promise 
as he declared `NUC cessation' (not `NUC abolishment') that 
`any constitutional reform will follow the current 
constitutional procedures.' . Faced with this situation, we 
believe, Chen should proactively put an end to the ongoing 
`referendum on a new Taiwan constitution' movement, which is 
holding its 10,000 scheduled discussion sessions now. ." 
 
L) "United States and China Operate Co-Management of Cross- 
Strait [Issues] for the First Time" 
 
Professor Chen Yu-chun, Director of Chinese Culture 
University's Graduate School of American Studies opined in 
the pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation: 400,000] 
(3/4): 
 
". Beijing's warnings and criticism against Bian will not 
stop now, but its strategy direction will be `fighting 
together better than fighting alone.'  In other words, 
Beijing will join the United States, the international 
community, and Taiwan people to jointly restrain Chen Shui- 
bian's move that `attempts to change the status quo' by 
describing him as the `troublemaker' for cross-Strait 
stability and `peace saboteur' for the Asia-Pacific region." 
 
M) "Wearing out Our Welcome" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China 
Post" [circulation: 30,000] editorialized (3/5): 
 
"Over the past few weeks, President Chen Shui-bian's 
administration has played a game of words that has caused 
serious harm to our special relationship with the United 
States. ... 
According to the U.S. State Department, Taipei has promised 
not to diverge from the carefully selected script, under 
which the NUC and guidelines were not officially 
`abolished.'  Foreign Minister James Huang has blamed the 
problem on erroneous news media reports and claimed that the 
matter was cleared up after discussions with officials from 
the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT).  Once again, 
officials are unfairly blaming the news media for allegedly 
being the source of all their problems. 
 
"Regardless of what was cleared up with AIT, the fact 
remains that our American friends have been forced to parse 
words and sift through videotapes of press conferences to 
determine whether our government is still trustworthy. 
Given the unique geopolitical situation that Taiwan is 
situated in, we simply cannot afford to place Washington in 
such a precarious position. ... It would seem not to be 
rocket science to assume that it would not be wise to 
irritate the United States by making promises that our 
officials can't keep for a single day.  It would also seem 
improper for our American friends to be kept guessing as to 
what the genuine intentions of our leaders are, despite 
weeks of intense communications behind the scenes.  But that 
is precisely what our government leaders are doing, putting 
our long-term security and interests at serious risk. ... 
 
 
 
"But over the past few years, President Chen's 
administration has squandered this positive development by 
constantly changing the status quo and making messes for the 
U.S. to help clean up. We will not be surprised if the 
United States decides it is better off leaving us to sleep 
in the bed we have made for ourselves.  President Chen 
should realize the long-term harm he is causing by offending 
and irritating the United States before our welcome is 
completely worn out." 
 
N) "Chen Hopes History Will Remember Him More Kindly" 
 
Joe Hung said in the conservative, pro-unification, English- 
language "China Post" [circulation: 30,000] (3/6): 
 
"Don't be surprised. It's Chen Shui-bian the defense lawyer 
at his best.  Only a day after the U.S. Department of State 
officially asked him to reinstate one of the five `no's' he 
had pledged, President Chen told the Yomiuri Shimbun of 
Tokyo on Friday he will give the people of Taiwan a `timely, 
relevant and viable' Constitution before he steps down on 
May 20, 2008. . 
 
"A consummate defense counselor, Chen insists his decision 
to `cease to function' did not either `abolish' or 
`terminate' the Council, whose National Unification 
Guidelines concomitantly `ceases to apply.' The fact is that 
he meant to abolish the organization President Lee created 
but told Washington what he announced should be considered 
to merely `freeze' it. Washington went along - until reports 
quoted or misquoted his aides as giving an accurate 
interpretation of his intended wording.  In a way of 
responding to the ultimatum of Foggy Bottom, President Chen 
defiantly spelt out his time schedule for the new 
Constitution to the world's largest newspaper. He did so, 
stubbornly convinced that Washington could do nothing to 
harm him as it didn't many times in the past couple of years 
when he defied Uncle Sam. 
 
"Chen would be able to get away almost unscathed this time. 
But at what cost to Taiwan! We have lost what little 
national credibility was left.  Oh, yes. Chen wants to be 
remembered in history as the president who sets Taiwan on 
course to independence. History will record Lee Teng hui as 
the president who transformed Taiwan from an autocratic 
state to a democracy. Much as he may wish, Lee has no chance 
to lead Taiwan to independence. Chen, his unanointed heir, 
has no such chance, either. But the younger man has whipped 
his party into line to obey his marching orders for 
independence. 
On this year's Peace Memorial Day, President Chen addressed 
a meeting to mark the fifty-ninth anniversary of the 
February 29 Incident of 1947. He iterated his decision to 
terminate the National Unification Council and asked his 
loyal audience if he was wrong in doing so. `Am I wrong?' he 
asked seven times. There was a chorus of `no.' 
 
"Let me answer his question: `Mr. President, you are not 
wrong. You've made no mistakes. The president is always 
right. It's your supporters who were wrong. They voted you 
in.'  History will not be kind to President Chen. 
Grandchildren of our grandchildren will remember him as the 
president who got reelected because he had been shot at by a 
mysterious gunman presumed to be an assassin." 
 
KEEGAN