VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #1018/01 1262222
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 062222Z MAY 07
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5153
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 6723
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 7972

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 001018 
 
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.-JAPAN SECURITY MEETING, 
U.S.-CHINA-TAIWAN RELATIONS 
 
 
¶1. Summary:  Almost all major Chinese-language papers in Taiwan gave 
front-page coverage to New York Yankees pitcher Wang Chien-ming, who 
is listed by "Time Magazine" as one of the 100 most influential 
people in the world.  The English-language dailies, however, all 
gave front-page coverage to AIT Director Stephen Young, who said in 
a Thursday press conference that Taiwan should focus on 
strengthening its defensive capabilities and should move to pass the 
arms procurement budget as early as possible.  The pro-independence 
"Liberty Times" ran a banner headline on page twelve that said 
"Stephen Young: Ruling and Opposition Parties Blame Each Other for 
Failing to Pass the Arms Procurement Bill."  The pro-unification 
"United Daily News" ran a news story on page eight with the headline 
"The United States Does Not Approve of Taiwan's Development of 
Offensive Weapons." 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, a news analysis in the 
pro-status quo "China Times" discussed AIT Director Young's remarks 
that "this is not the first time that cross-Strait issue was not 
included in the joint declaration of the Two-plus-Two meeting."  The 
article said Young's statement seemed to dwell on the minor points 
while avoiding touching the core issue.  With regard to 
U.S.-China-Taiwan relations, an editorial in the pro-independence, 
English-language "Taipei Times" discussed Deputy Secretary of State 
John Negroponte's recent remarks before the U.S. Congress and said 
his comments are "just a sad reminder that the current US 
administration is a parody of the kind of statesmanship that once 
existed in Washington."  An op-ed piece in the "Taipei Times" said 
U.S.-Taiwan relations are at a sensitive juncture requiring 
discussions on a regular basis.  End summary. 
 
¶3. U.S.-Japan Security Meeting 
 
"The United States' and Japan's Avoiding Discussion of Controversial 
Cross-Strait Situation Has Impact on Taiwan" 
 
Washington correspondent Liu Ping noted in an analysis in the 
pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation: 400,000] (5/4): 
 
"... [AIT Director] Stephen Young said in Taipei that 'this is not 
the first time that the cross-Strait issue was not mentioned' in the 
joint declaration of the Two-plus-Two meeting.  But such a statement 
gave [people] the feeling that [he was] dwelling on the minor points 
but avoiding touching the core of the matter.  This is because there 
are always different forms of documents coming out in the wake of 
the Two-plus-Two meeting.  The 'common strategic goals' established 
in 2005 was an original approach, so for any follow-on changes, one 
must compare them with this historical document. 
 
"Two 'Two-plus-Two' meetings were held since 2005, but the two 
meetings were held mainly to discuss the re-alignment of the U.S. 
military.  As a result, there was no real record of 'common 
strategic goals.'  But for this year, the sentence regarding 
'encouraging both sides of the Taiwan Strait to resolve their 
disputes peacefully' was removed from the results of this year's 
meeting.  This is what it really matters.  During the joint press 
conference afterwards, a sensitive reporter sensed the change and 
thus questioned U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.  Even 
though Rice personally indicated that 'there is no change in the 
policy,' such an approach [i.e. the removal of the cross-Strait 
issue] was very special, given that the fundamental situation across 
the Taiwan Strait remains basically intact. ..." 
 
¶4. U.S.-China-Taiwan Relations 
 
A) "All Too Hard for the State Department" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 
30,000] editorialized (5/4): 
 
"... But what was disturbing on Tuesday was the interaction between 
Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte and his interlocutors on 
the House Foreign Affairs Committee.  Republican Representative 
Steve Chabot questioned Negroponte over the possibility of changing 
the government's stance on allowing senior Taiwanese officials to 
visit Washington. ...  Unsurprisingly, Negroponte poured cold water 
on the idea. ...  What is disturbing about these comments is 
Negroponte's apparent ignorance of the subtleties and nuance of the 
'one China' policy. 
 
"A seasoned diplomat should be able to discern the difference 
between a 'view that there is one government of China' and 
acknowledging 'that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait 
maintain there is but one China.'  The formulation of 'one China' in 
the communique is a masterpiece of diplomatic slipperiness.  What 
does it mean to 'acknowledge'?  What does it mean to 'maintain'? 
And most important, how does one define 'Chinese on either side of 
the Taiwan Strait'?  The phrasing of the communique was designed to 
give the US government as much wiggle-room as possible.  This is 
 
because the officials who devised it were not arrogant enough to 
assume that they knew what the future might hold for Taiwan and 
China and their relationship with the US 
 
"Negroponte's comments, however, are just a sad reminder that the 
current US administration is a parody of the kind of statesmanship 
that once existed in Washington.  The unthinking embrace of what is 
basically the Chinese definition of 'one China,' rather than a 
defense of the longstanding US policy, shows how far Washington has 
fallen in its lack of imagination and competence.  There is no one 
in the US administration or in the world who knows how the 
'situation' in the Taiwan Strait will be resolved.  Yet the Bush 
administration continues to indicate that it not only believes it 
know what the future holds for this complex situation, but that it 
is simply tired of dealing with the complexities of Taiwan 
altogether.  How unfortunate that policymakers in Washington no 
longer seek to stand on the shoulders of giants, instead of 
preferring to be led by dwarves." 
 
B) "US, Taiwan Ties at a Sensitive Time" 
 
Nat Bellocchi, a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan 
and now a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group, opined in the 
pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 
30,000] (5/4): 
 
"... Time has brought some changes.  Despite its preference not to 
intervene, the US has found that dealing with a free democracy isn't 
always easy.  The US sees some differences:  credibility, unclear 
communication, constitutional reform, the meaning of the status quo 
and the lack of military support, to name a few.  Taiwan also sees 
differences:  a lack of transparency, the US' unilaterally 
established rules of engagement with Taiwan and a lack of high-level 
meetings, among others.  All of these require discussions on a 
regular basis. ... 
 
"The political changes in Taiwan are already beginning.  The US is 
weighing which of the two parties in Taiwan will win in the 
legislature and the presidency and what impact the result will have 
on US interests with China and other East Asian countries.  Some 
better form of dialogue between the US and Taiwan has long been 
needed, and it will be needed in the years ahead. ..." 
 
YOUNG