VZCZCXYZ0437
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #1429/01 1730837
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 220837Z JUN 07
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5763
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 6950
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 8204

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 001429 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - DAVID FIRESTEIN 
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-TAIWAN RELATIONS 
 
 
¶1. Summary:  Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news 
coverage June 22 on the release of a convicted "rice bomber" 
Thursday after President Chen Shui-bian granted him a special 
pardon; on the Basic Competence Test for junior high school students 
island-wide; on the 2008 presidential election; and on soaring 
Taiwan shares.  The pro-independence "Liberty Times" ran an 
exclusive news story on page eight with the headline "Frank Hsieh: 
[I Am] for the Referendum on the Island's UN Bid under the Name 
Taiwan."  The pro-unification "United Daily News," however, carried 
a news story on page four with the headline "[U.S. President] Bush 
Likely to Criticize Bian in Public Again." 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an editorial in the 
mass-circulation "Apple Daily" criticized President Chen for his 
"detestable and stupid" referendum proposal, which will deteriorate 
Taiwan-U.S. relations and endanger Taiwan's security.  The "Black 
and White" column in the "United Daily News" also chimed in, saying 
that it is the Taiwan people who will have to endure the damage done 
to Taiwan-U.S. relations incurred by President Chen's proposed 
referendum.  An editorial in the limited-circulation, conservative, 
pro-unification, English-language "China Post" criticized President 
Chen for using Taiwan's UN bid to influence the presidential 
election.  A "Liberty Times" editorial, however, criticized the 
United States for its opposition to Taiwan's UN bid.  The article 
said the United States has deviated from the values of democracy and 
freedom.  An editorial in the limited-circulation, pro-independence, 
English-language "Taipei Times" said "it is better to be rejected by 
the UN when applying as 'Taiwan' than to be accepted under a name 
not befitting a sovereign nation."  A separate "Taipei Times" op-ed, 
written by U.S. Congressional Research Service policy analyst 
Shirley Kan, discussed the origins of the Taiwan Relations Act and 
the "Six Assurances" made by the Reagan administration in 1982.  Kan 
said the "U.S. policy focuses on the process of resolution of the 
Taiwan question, not its outcome," and that "it is not very 
satisfactory or fair."  End summary. 
 
A) "The Stupid Referendum That Harms the [Taiwan] People and [the 
DPP's] Comrade" 
 
The mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 520,000] 
editorialized (6/22): 
 
"Chen Shui-bian is pushing for a referendum again, and its topic is 
'[Taiwan's] bid to join the United Nations under the name Taiwan.' 
Rarely does one see the president of a democratic country who likes 
to toy with referenda and play tricks to sabotage other people. ... 
Bian's trap has failed to harm Ma Ying-jeou; instead, it has 
sabotaged Frank Hsieh and put him in an awkward position.  Hsieh is 
forced to clarify his stand [on the issue] to the United States.  If 
he said he supports [Chen's initiative], he will not be able to win 
U.S. support, and he might even be faced with difficulties or ask 
for an insult.  But if he expresses opposition to the referendum, he 
will upset Bian, who can play tricks behind Hsieh's back and harm 
his campaign.  [Bian's] abuse of solemn and sacred referenda to hurt 
other people ends up hurting his own comrades, spoiling Taiwan-U.S. 
relations, and endangering Taiwan's security.  It is really 
detestable and stupid." 
 
B) "A Slap in the Face" 
 
The "Black and White" column in the pro-unification "United Daily 
News" [circulation: 400,000] wrote (6/22): 
 
"... Regardless of what Bian's mindset was [in terms of his attempt 
to hold a referendum on Taiwan's UN bid under the name Taiwan], what 
he has done was akin to slapping [AIT Chairman Raymond] Burghardt 
hard in the face.  But the United States' counterattack came quickly 
and ruthlessly.  The State Department immediately mentioned Bian's 
name and indicated in a tough manner its opposition to Bian's 
proposed referendum.  It also pointed out that such an initiative 
appears designed to alter Taiwan's status quo and will certainly 
increase tensions in the Taiwan Strait.  Even though Bian asked for 
a slap in the face himself, the damage he has done to Taiwan-U.S. 
relations will have to be endured by all the Taiwan people. ..." 
 
C) "U.N. Bid Intended to Influence Elections" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" 
[circulation: 30,000] editorialized (6/22): 
 
"Practically everything President Chen Shui-bian recently said in 
public has generated much controversy.  He probably did so 
deliberately, as a series of major elections are at hand.  He and 
his Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) are probably beating their 
brains out to devise effective campaign tactics. ...  The question 
is not whether the United States can force Taiwan to deny its 
sovereignty.  The real question is whether Taiwan wants the U.S. to 
help defend itself in case of a military attack by mainland China. 
If President Chen violates his promise not to seek Taiwan 
 
independence during his term, he and his party will lose the trust 
and the support of the island's most important ally." 
 
D) "How Can the United States Deviate from the Values of Democracy 
and Freedom and Oppose 'Taiwan's' Participation in the United 
Nations?" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 500,000] 
editorialized (6/22): 
 
"... It is a demonstration of the spirit of democracy to decide on a 
major issue and to resolve differences between two sides through the 
method of referenda.  Various elections in the United States were 
often held in tandem with referenda on local or national issues.  A 
referendum is already part of the normality of democracy.  Thus, 
Washington's opposition to Taiwan's holding a referendum on the 
island's UN bid under the name Taiwan is obviously [a decision] made 
from the perspective of international politics, and it is unrelated 
to the fundamental values of democracy and human rights.  In other 
words, the United States sees the referendum as a diplomatic issue 
rather than the yearning of the 23 million Taiwan people for the 
island's room for survival in the international community.  The 
United States' intention and its apprehension of China's pressure is 
understandable, but the Taiwan people will by no means identify with 
its opposition to [Taiwan's plan to hold a] referendum.  Taiwan's 
holding a referendum on its UN bid under the name Taiwan is a move 
not only to pursue the benefits that the Taiwan people deserve but 
also to express the island's willingness to fulfill its obligations 
as a member of the international community.  The U.S. opposition has 
not only deviated from its founding spirit of democracy and freedom 
but also damaged the ideals of the world commonwealth. ..." 
 
E) "'Taiwan' Is Worth Fighting for" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 
30,000] editorialized (6/22): 
 
"At the expense of ruffling feathers in Washington, the Democratic 
Progressive Party (DPP) is pushing ahead with a national referendum 
on joining the UN under the name 'Taiwan.'  Considering the somewhat 
frayed relationship between President Chen Shui-bian's 
administration and the US, the tit-for-tat exchanges have hardly 
been surprising.  While the DPP is doing little to endear itself to 
the ever-irritable US State Department, its strategy naturally 
serves a domestic purpose.  By trying to connect the referendum to 
next year's elections, Chen hopes pro-green-camp voters will turn 
out in higher numbers. ... 
 
"While applying to international agencies under the name 'Taiwan' 
does not usually meet with success -- as demonstrated by its WHO bid 
this spring -- it is important for Taiwan to maintain a standard. 
And it is better to be rejected by the UN when applying as 'Taiwan' 
than to be accepted under a name not befitting a sovereign nation." 
 
F) "The TRA and Reagan's Assurances" 
 
Shirley Kan, a policy analyst at the Congressional Research Service 
(CRS) in Washington, opined in the pro-independence, 
English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 30,000] (6/22): 
 
"US policy is not perfect.  The US' 'one China' policy is frequently 
criticized.  Some say it lacks sufficient clarity, credibility and 
coherence.  Others argue that it lacks consistency.  Still others 
call it dangerous.  Sometimes, the policy seems secretive and 
contradictory.  US policy could be more supportive of the Taiwanese 
and their quest for international recognition. ... 
 
"In other words, US policy focuses on the process of resolution of 
the Taiwan question, not its outcome.  It is not very satisfactory 
or fair.  But if Taipei pushes for a clearer US position on the 
status of Taiwan, it might be even less satisfied." 
 
YOUNG