VZCZCXYZ0005
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #0688/01 0850910
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 260910Z MAR 07
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4620
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 6527
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 7769

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000688 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - LLOYD NEIGHBORS 
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-TAIWAN RELATIONS, IRAQ, JAPAN'S 
RELATIONS WITH CHINA 
 
 
¶1. Summary:  Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused new 
coverage March 24-26 on a TV debate held Saturday among three DPP 
presidential hopefuls vying for the party's presidential candidacy 
in 2008; on the alleged scandal involving the privatization of the 
Taiwan Television Enterprise; and on other local issues.  The 
pro-independence "Liberty Times," on the other hand, devoted its 
entire page three March 26 to discussing the undesirable 
consequences Taiwan has suffered as a result of exporting its 
agricultural crop seeds and agricultural technology to China. 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an editorial in the 
pro-status quo "China Times" discussed the DPP's debate among its 
presidential hopefuls Saturday.  The article pointed out the DPP 
aspirants' unanimous position of not continuing to keep the "Four 
Nos' pledge that President Chen Shui-bian made to the United States, 
if they are elected president in 2008, and said it remains to be 
seen how this topic will develop in the near future.  An editorial 
in the limited-circulation, conservative, pro-unification, 
English-language "China Post," on the other hand, commented on the 
war in Iraq and said "Iran is the obvious winner [of the war], 
without costing a cent and a soldier."  A separate "China Post" 
editorial focused on Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's remarks on 
the "comfort women" during World War II.  The article said Abe's 
remarks greatly offended South Korea, China, and Taiwan and he may 
"have dampened the prospects for a summit with President George W. 
Bush in Washington at the end of April after he meets with Wen 
Jiabao in Tokyo."  End summary. 
 
¶3. U.S.-Taiwan Relations 
 
"Has the [DPP] Debate Set the Tone for the Green Camp's Campaigning 
Leitmotif?" 
 
The pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation: 400,000] 
editorialized (3/26): 
 
"In an attempt to vie for their party's nomination [for the 2008 
presidential election], three bigwigs of the ruling party have 
started their warm-up via the debate hosted by the Taiwan Society 
Saturday.  Even though this debate was for the Green camp's internal 
consumption, to a certain extent it could still constrain the 
campaigning style of the ruling party's presidential candidate for 
¶2008. ... 
 
"[The debate] turned more interesting when it comes to [the 
bigwigs'] statements of their positions toward the 'Four Nos and One 
Without' pledge.  When asked whether they will reiterate the 'Four 
Nos and One Without' pledge to the United States, the three bigwigs 
- Yu Shyi-kun, Su Tseng-chang, and Frank Hsieh - all noted 
unanimously that they 'will not promise [to do so],' with the only 
difference lying in the strength of how they said it.  This 
development delivered a very important message:  namely, it seems 
that the Green camp's toleration of the 'Four Nos and One Without' 
will come to an end when Bian finishes his term of office -- a 
situation that obviously differs from Washington's perspective.  It 
is true that during his term of office, Bian has never abandoned the 
attempt to get rid of the constraints of the 'Four Nos and One 
Without.'  But the fact is that neither has Washington ever loosened 
the 'incantation crown' that it placed upon Taiwan regarding this 
issue.  [Editorial note:  this is a literary allusion to "Journey to 
the West," in which the Monkey King Sun Wukong wore a crown on his 
head that the Buddhist monk Xuan Zang could tighten painfully by 
chanting an incantation.  He used this crown to keep the mischievous 
monkey under control.] Bian was forced to clarify, immediately after 
he made the 'Four Wants and One Without' remarks, that what he said 
did not violate the 'Four Nos' pledge.  The U.S. side has been very 
patient in chanting repeatedly the 'Four Nos and One Without' 
pledge, an evident move showing that Washington has always taken 
this pledge seriously and that it has never believed that this 
pledge would work on Bian alone.  Now that the three bigwigs have 
all stated that they would not inherit such a 'pledge,' which is 
akin to stating that they would not adhere to such a pledge, it will 
be a whole new situation.  It remains to be seen as to how the 
United States will react to this situation, but we are sure that 
this was definitely not the only time that these presidential 
hopefuls would declare their positions [over the pledge].  In the 
future, all these bigwigs will be asked repeatedly about this 
question, and it will not be easy for the United States to back off 
drastically from the bottom line of the 'Four Nos and One Without' 
pledge.  It really deserves continuous monitoring as to how this 
topic will develop in this nationwide election. ..." 
 
¶4. Iraq 
 
"Who Is Winning in Iraq?" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" 
[circulation: 30,000] editorialized (3/24): 
 
 
"Four years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, what has the world 
learned from the costly war?  Simply put, it seems to have proved 
the wisdom of the Chinese saying:  'Tyranny shall perish; aggression 
will be defeated.'  The world has seen the demise of Saddam 
Hussein's tyranny, and the inevitable defeat of the U.S. invasion 
(aggression could be too harsh a word), a la Vietnam.  Few would 
shed tears for Saddam's hanging, whose brutal rule of Iraq deserved 
the punishment.  But George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq is 
ill-advised at best, and unjust at worst.  Fighting terrorism is a 
just cause, but invading Iraq is not. ... 
 
"Now, after four years, US$800 billion in military spending, and 
3,000 plus U.S. troops killed on Iraqi soil, who is the winner? 
Certainly not the United States.  But the United States has won 
great victories for Iran, a long-time nemesis.  Bush has vanquished 
Iran's two biggest enemies - the Taliban to the east and Saddam to 
the west.  Now, Iran has become a superpower of sorts in the Middle 
East.  Iran is so defiant as to call Bush's bluff in its nuclear 
confrontation with the United States.  So bewildering and stupid is 
the Bush administration's policy on Iraq that a New York Times 
columnist called Dick Cheney an 'Iranian mole' in the White House, 
because the vice president has Bush's ear on Iraq.  The war is not 
over yet.  For now at least, Iran is the obvious winner, without 
costing a cent and a soldier." 
 
¶5. Japan's Relations with China 
 
"Abe Shows Silence Is Golden" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" 
[circulation: 30,000] editorialized (3/26): 
 
"Shinzo Abe, Japanese prime minister, said again there is no proof 
of coercion in the recruitment of what the military euphemistically 
called comfort women. ...  Abe may be just honest.  But he should 
not have said so unless he wanted to strain relations between Japan 
and China, which he is trying hard to nurse back from a near freeze 
he inherited from his predecessor Junichiro Koizumi.  Abe 
sidestepped the Yasukuni visit issue to disarm China to the extent 
that Beijing did not raise hell when he rammed through a new 
education law stressing patriotism and upgraded the defense agency 
to the status of ministry. ... 
 
"Abe's remarks greatly offended South Korea.  Taipei protested, too. 
 He may also have dampened the prospects for a summit with President 
George W. Bush in Washington at the end of April after he meets with 
Wen Jiabao in Tokyo. ..." 
 
WANG