VZCZCXYZ0012
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #3682/01 3030949
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 300949Z OCT 06
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2798
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 5843
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 7061

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 003682 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - DAVID FIRESTEIN 
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S. ARMS SALES TO TAIWAN 
 
 
¶1. Summary:  Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies continued to 
give significant reporting and editorial coverage October 28-30 to 
AIT Taipei Director Stephen Young's press conference last Thursday; 
to the reactions by Taiwan's ruling and opposition parties to 
Young's remarks on arms procurements; and to the remarks by a senior 
U.S. official showing strong support for Young.  News coverage also 
focused on the year-end Taipei and Kaohsiung mayoral races and other 
political issues.  The pro-status quo "China Times" front-paged a 
banner headline October 30 that read "KMT's Bottom Line: Pick One of 
the Three Weaponry Items; Green Light for the Anti-submarine 
Aircraft Budget."  The pro-independence "Liberty Times," Taiwan's 
largest-circulation daily, on the other hand, ran a banner headline 
on page two October 30 that said "Arms Procurement Bill to Run a 
Blockade Tomorrow; KMT and PFP Give Order to Block [It]."  The 
"China Times" also carried the results of its latest survey October 
28, which showed 66 percent of those polled believe Young's remarks 
were akin to diplomatic intimidation.  The same poll also found 
Taiwan people's favorable impression of the United States has 
dropped from 68 percent in 2003, when the United States attacked 
Iraq, to a new low of 45 percent. 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, a "Liberty Times" 
editorial said the United States adopted a tough position with 
regard to arms procurements because it disdains the fact that some 
political parties in Taiwan put their own interests ahead of the 
island's national interests.  A column in the mass-circulation 
"Apple Daily" said when Washington talked about the "mess," it was 
aimed at warning the KMT.  An editorial in the limited-circulation, 
pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" predicted that 
"the arms bill is likely to remain a hostage of the deadlocked 
legislature."  A "China Times" editorial said Young's remarks were 
by no means conducive to breaking the stalemate on the arms 
procurement bill.  An editorial in the pro-unification "United Daily 
News" strongly criticized Young's tone at the press conference, 
calling it a tone of "an arrogant, bossy, and overweening [colonial] 
governor."  A "China Times" commentary said the United States' 
excessive arrogance has humiliated Taiwan, but Taiwan will not meet 
Washington's national interests.  An editorial in the 
limited-circulation, conservative, pro-unification, English-language 
"China Post" said Washington "overreacted" and that "all that is 
needed is a little more patience on the part of Uncle Sam the 
referee to call an end to Taiwan's inter-party political football 
game."   End summary. 
 
A) "How Can the Normal Functioning of the Legislative Body Continue 
to Deteriorate Like This?" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 600,000] 
editorialized (10/30): 
 
"... In reality, the United States adopts a tough stand with regard 
to the arms sales [to Taiwan] because it disdains the fact that 
under a democratic system, some political parties in Taiwan put 
their interests and position ahead of the national interests and 
totally disregard the survival of their people.  The U.S. government 
evidently believes that the pan-Blue camp's approach has violated 
the normal practices in a democracy.  In addition, in terms of 
Washington's global strategy, the United States first engaged itself 
in a war in Afghanistan in the wake of the September 11 terrorist 
attacks, followed by a war in Iraq.   No matter how powerful the 
United States' national strength may be, it began to feel incapable 
of doing everything it wanted to do, and the anti-war sentiment is 
rising in the United States as well.  Meantime, China's military 
expansion is underway in East Asia, together with North Korea's 
nuclear test and other rogue means such as test-firing ballistic 
missiles for the purpose of coercion.  Should China attempt to start 
a war while Taiwan does not yet possess the deterrent force to 
defend itself, there may not be enough time for the United States to 
come to Taiwan's aid, even if Washington intends to assist the 
island.  Also, the situation does not seem very optimistic as to 
whether the American people are willing to sacrifice their lives for 
a country which is unwilling to shoulder the responsibility of 
self-defense. ..." 
 
B) "Whose Mess?" 
 
Columnist Antonio Chiang commented in the mass-circulation "Apple 
Daily" [circulation: 500,000] (10/30): 
 
"... The international situation has undergone dramatic changes over 
the past six years.  Even if Taiwan decides to buy all the weaponry 
items in the arms procurement package, the prime time of Taiwan-U.S. 
relations is gone for good.  Both Taiwan and the United States will 
each have a new government in 2008, and this will add double 
variables and create a new impact to Taipei-Washington relations. 
There are many factors that affect Taiwan-U.S. relations, and arms 
procurements is just one of them; A-Bian's credibility and 
constitutional reforms are also factors.  But what's most important 
are the changes in U.S. strategic interests, while the Taiwan issue 
 
is subordinate to this big international framework.  Now the 
Americans have no faith in Taiwan's future direction, either.  That 
is why they are using the arms deal and making a fuss about it. ... 
In reality, when the United States talked about the mess, it was 
aimed at telling the KMT that if Taiwan fails to buy those weapons 
now, and if the island, given the drumbeat for KMT-CCP cooperation, 
is leaning toward China in 2008, no one will be able to clean up the 
mess then." 
 
C) "Taiwan's Defense in US Hands" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 
30,000] editorialized (10/29): 
 
"Comments by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last week 
regarding the US' commitment to help Taiwan defend itself were 
nothing new.  However, they came in the wake of regional tension 
over the nuclear test by North Korea and in response to questions 
over Taiwan's role in international efforts to deal with the crisis. 
...  On the other hand, it just so happens that Rice's comments were 
made at around the same time that the US-China Economic and Security 
Review Commission - a US government advisory panel - was getting 
ready to approve a report that highlights China's advanced military 
capabilities. ... 
 
"The supplemental [arms procurement] budget was the product of a 
compromise between the ruling and opposition camps to begin with, 
approving greatly reduced funds in comparison with the funding 
initially requested for the arms procurement program.  In light of 
these events, the arms bill is likely to remain a hostage of the 
deadlocked legislature.  The likelihood of the nation becoming less 
reliant on US protection is remote." 
 
D) "Stephen Young's Remarks Are by No Means Conducive for Resolving 
the [Stalled] Arms Procurement Bill" 
 
The pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation: 400,000] (10/28): 
 
"... Perhaps Stephen Young is aware, or maybe he's not, that the 
arms procurement, among all the contentious or issues in Taiwan, has 
long surpassed its pure nature of national defense security; it even 
has little to do with Taiwan-U.S. relations and is basically deeply 
entwined with the emotions and sentiments of the ruling and 
opposition parties in Taiwan.  If Young does not believe [the 
theory], why not take a look at the reactions of the ruling and 
opposition parties over the past few days.  Neither side really 
echoed the perspective emphasized by the United States or 
objectively discussed whether there is indeed a military imbalance 
in the Taiwan Strait.  Instead, they just directly focused in on the 
leitmotiv of 'whether the United States supports Bian.'  Is this the 
message that Young originally expected to convey?  When this issue 
was quickly simplified to this level, will it move toward the 
direction that the United States expected it to?  ... 
 
"It is understandable that, given the fact that the arms deal has 
been stalled for five years, the United States, no matter how much 
patience it has, has to complain.  But no matter how urgent the 
issue becomes, [the United States] should communicate [with Taiwan] 
via informal lobbying channels.  Sooner or later, this controversy 
will have to be resolved. ...  Speaking openly in a tone that was 
close to threatening to challenge the Legislative Yuan has not only 
evidently trespassed the line of diplomatic protocol but will by no 
means be conducive in resolving the issue." 
 
E) "Stephen Young's Tone as a [Colonial] Governor Outrages the 
Public" 
 
The pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 400,000] 
editorialized (10/28): 
 
"U.S. representative to Taiwan Stephen Young's making a big show to 
deliver an ultimatum via a press conference has pushed the arms 
procurement bill deeper into deadlock, because no country with 
rationality and dignity will follow Young's orders under such 
threatening and humiliating circumstances. ...  Young's tone was by 
no means that of a qualified and civil 'ambassador'; it was in 
reality the tone of an arrogant, bossy, and overweening [colonial] 
governor.  Do we really have to put up with that? 
 
"We support 'reasonable arms procurements'; even if Taiwan signs a 
'peace treaty' with Beijing, it definitely must maintain a 
'reasonable military buildup.'  Taiwan people originally supported 
the arms procurements, but the stalled arms procurement bill has 
reflected very profound changes in public opinion and democratic 
thinking.  Young must truly understand these profound issues in 
Taiwan's politics and should not operate in the opposite way and 
bully the weaker using his power in a tone of a [colonial] governor. 
..." 
 
F) "Taiwan Did Not Eat Its Meal for Free" 
 
The "Short Commentary" column in the pro-status quo "China Times" 
[circulation: 400,000] (10/30): 
 
"... Everybody knows that Taiwan's security is reliant on the United 
States, but this dependence is not merely a burden for the United 
States, which has, in reality, gained huge benefits in return.  This 
is the main reason why the U.S. cross-Strait policy remains stable. 
Should [Washington] give up or change its consistent policy, it must 
be because major changes have happened to the United States' 
strategic interests.  [Should this happen], the United States will 
not soften its stance, even if Taiwan begs to seek [the U.S.] 
support. ... 
 
"All Taiwan people acknowledge the reality that Taiwan's security 
has to rely on the United States, but they have also paid a price 
for it over the past decades.  Even though the bilateral 
relationship is not completely equal, neither side is allowed to 
dictate and take whatever it likes.  Excessive imbalance and 
arrogance has humiliated Taiwan, but it certainly will not meet the 
U.S. national interests." 
 
G) "A New Political Football" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" 
[circulation: 30,000] (10/30): 
 
"... The Bush administration overreacted.  The people of Taiwan 
certainly will not emulate the South Koreans by going to the streets 
to protest against its warnings.  But their pride is seriously hurt 
by the way the United States treated their country.  They don't 
understand why Washington should issue what they believe is an 
ultimatum now.  Given time, Ma Ying-jeou will deliver his promise. 
All that is needed is a little more patience on the part of Uncle 
Sam the referee to call an end to Taiwan's inter party political 
football game." 
 
YOUNG