VZCZCXYZ0003
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #1694/01 2110937
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 300937Z JUL 07
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6182
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 7070
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 8317

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 001694 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD 
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: DPP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE FRANK HSIEH'S 
U.S. TRIP, TAIWAN'S UN BID 
 
 
¶1. Summary:  Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news 
coverage July 28-30 on the tumbling of Taiwan's stock price index, 
which fell 4.2% last Friday; on DPP presidential candidate Frank 
Hsieh's visit to the United States; on Taiwan's bid to join the 
United Nations; on Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's Liberal 
Democratic Party's defeat in the Japanese upper house elections; and 
on the 2008 presidential poll. The centrist, KMT-leaning "China 
Times" ran a banner headline on page four that read "Consequence of 
[Taiwan's] UN Referendum?  Trouble Arises with Regard to Ma 
[Ying-jeou's Upcoming] Trip to the United States."  Also, almost all 
papers carried the remarks by the U.S. State Department Friday that 
President Chen Shui-bian's push for joining the United Nations under 
the name "Taiwan" has violated his pledge of "not changing the 
national title." 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an op-ed in the 
pro-independence "Liberty Times" criticized DPP presidential 
candidate Frank Hsieh for having promised the United States that he 
will not hold a referendum on unification or independence.  A column 
in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" said Hsieh's feigning surprise 
with the U.S.'s strong reaction to Taiwan's UN referendum was aimed 
at winning over the Americans' support for him.  A "China Times" 
column expressed worry that the simple wish of the Taiwan people to 
join the international community may be intensified into strong 
indignation under deliberate campaign manipulation.  A column in the 
pro-unification "United Daily News" said no one in the U.S. 
executive branch is willing to speak in favor of President Chen any 
more, and there is not much Hsieh can do now.  With regard to 
Taiwan's UN bid, an editorial in the conservative, pro-unification, 
English-language "China Post" said Taiwan's new bid for UN 
membership is a foolish and futile move.  An op-ed in the 
pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times," however, urged 
Taiwan not to give up on its UN bid.  A separate "China Post" 
editorial, on the other hand, categorized President Chen Shui-bian's 
remarks on the Taiwan Relations Act as if he wants to practice law 
in the United States. End summary. 
 
¶3. DPP Presidential Candidate Frank Hsieh's U.S. Trip 
 
A)  "The Flaws in Frank Hsieh's U.S. Visit" 
 
Commentator Cao Changqing opined in the pro-independence "Liberty 
Times" [circulation: 720,000] (7/30): 
 
"... In his speech, Frank Hsieh made two promises to the U.S.: if he 
wins the presidential election, he will not hold a referendum on 
unification or independence, nor will he orchestrate a movement 
toward Taiwan independence.  Hsieh's promises have caused 
dissatisfaction from several people, because the promises are 
problematic in at least two aspects.  First, the promises are 
self-contradictory.  Hsieh said that the reason for 'not holding a 
referendum on unification or independence' is because Taiwan is 
already a sovereign, independent country.  However, if Taiwan is 
already a sovereign independent country (especially a democratic 
one), then any referendum is not only a 'domestic affair,' but is 
also one of the basic rights of its people.  This right cannot be 
transferred, traded, or sold. 
 
"With regard to the 'Taiwan independence movement,' it is 
substantially a 'country normalization' movement: to make 'Taiwan' a 
genuine normal country through referenda and establishment of a 
constitution.  That Frank Hsieh made a compromise on such an 
important issue is making 'cutting corners' on important ideas and 
principles, such as 'civic rights' and 'freedom of choice.' 
 
"Second, Hsieh is eating his words.  ... Three months after Hsieh 
promised on TV that he will not abide by [President Chen 
Shui-bian's] 'Four Nos and One Without', Hsieh made an explicit 
promise to the U.S. side that he 'will not hold a referendum on 
unification or independence' if he wins the presidential election. 
[Frank Hsieh is] a politician who does not value integrity, and who 
makes a promise even without any U.S. pressure.  What kind of 
compromise will he make in the future if he is really under 
pressure?  It is worrisome. 
 
"... After Hsieh arrived in the U.S., he refrained from mentioning 
'constitutional reform and name change' or normalization to a 
country, but he tried to curry favor for the U.S. administration and 
emphasized the 'status quo' to let the U.S. rest assured, and to 
allow Hsieh be trusted.  Even after the U.S. Department of State 
openly opposed Taiwan to 'join the UN under the name of Taiwan,' 
Hsieh did not fight for Taiwan but said that the U.S. opposition is 
'understandable.'  How can it be understandable?  It completely 
violates the foundations of the United States and the principle of 
democracy.  ..." 
 
B) "Frank Hsieh's Preventive Measure in Terms of Internal Affairs" 
U.S. TRIP, TAIWAN'S UN BID 
 
Columnist Antonio Chiang noted in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" 
[circulation: 510,000] (7/30): 
 
"... Taiwan and the United States have many communication channels. 
Various people had already briefed Frank Hsieh prior to his visit to 
the United States, so he was clearly aware of the U.S. position. 
Even though being in the United States in person might be a 
different matter, Hsieh should not have been too surprised by the 
U.S. reaction.  Hsieh is a smart person, and his feigning surprise 
could be a way to draw a line between himself and A-Bian, and also, 
to indicate that he is flexible enough to be trained and he will 
thus have more room [than A-Bian] to adjust his policies.  Americans 
must be very fond of his surprise. 
 
"The United States spent plenty of time meeting and talking with 
Hsieh, this is a kind of 'preventive diplomacy.'  Hsieh, in return, 
has been trying every way he could to win over the Americans, which 
can also be viewed as a preventive approach. ...  China's Taiwan 
Affairs Office cautioned openly that [Taiwan's] referendum on 
joining the United Nations has crossed the red line in terms of 
cross-Strait relations.  It goes without saying that such remarks 
were meant to pave the way for the U.S. reaction afterwards.  It was 
also a preventive measure in an attempt to increase credibility for 
Washington's good-intentioned admonition [against Taiwan]. ..." 
 
C) "Communication or Not?" 
 
The "Short Commentary" column in the centrist, KMT-leaning "China 
Times" [circulation: 400,000] wrote (7/28): 
 
"No matter how hard DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh has tried 
to communicate with the United States this time, the gap between the 
two sides over Taiwan's UN referendum remains the same.  Hsieh's 
trip this time, as a result, has become a journey of 'listening to 
[Washington's] lecturing.'  In terms of its results, yes, Hsieh has 
at least learned a lot of first-hand information from the United 
States.  What needs to be pondered on, though, is that if Washington 
does view Taiwan's UN referendum as a matter of great substance, it 
should have conveyed the same message to President Chen Shui-bian 
via appropriate channels in the beginning.  How come such a message 
has never been made public? Was it because the high-ranking 
officials in the Presidential Office disregarded it, or they have 
been trying to cover it up? 
 
"Joining the United Nations has been an unfailing wish of the Taiwan 
people, and referenda are also a normal practice to express public 
opinion in democratic countries.  For the general public, the UN 
referendum is simply a way that they hope to use to express the 
voice of their heart, so that the international community can accept 
Taiwan; they do not mean it to be a public vote on independence, 
neither do they want to declare independence immediately.  The 
strong opposition of big countries such as the United States, though 
not unexpected, did hurt the Taiwan people's feelings. .... 
 
"Given the international reality, the United Nations cannot possibly 
accept [Taiwan's application], and the UN referendum will not make 
the Republic of China disappear or change it into the Republic of 
Taiwan.  But the trust between Taiwan and the United States is 
seriously damaged, and the chances are slim for the UN referendum to 
stop, as Chen Shui-bian has obvious no intention to compromise.  As 
a result, the simple wish of the Taiwan people to participate in the 
international community will perhaps be intensified, under 
deliberate campaign manipulation, into stronger indignation and a 
sense of victimization." 
 
D) "What Else Can Frank Hsieh Do?" 
 
Journalist Sun Yang-ming wrote in the "United Notes" column in the 
pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 400,000] (7/29): 
 
"According to the United States' way of putting it, the message 
Frank Hsieh got during his trip to the United States this time, was 
consistent and cold.  Washington did not accept the argument that 
'Chen Shui-bian is an ideologist while Hsieh is a pragmatist.' ... 
Beijing has defined the UN referendum pushed by the Bian 
administration as a move that touches on the bottom line of the 
Anti-Secession Law has conveyed such a position to Washington. 
Washington also identified with Beijing's position and, worst of 
all, no one in the executive branch in Washington is willing to 
speak on behalf of the Bian Administration.  In addition to 
offending [U.S. President George W.] Bush, Bian has also annoyed two 
main agencies in charge of the Taiwan policy - namely, the State 
Department and the National Security Council. ...  The [Taiwan 
authorities] were hoping to purchase six Boeing 787 airplanes in 
exchange for A-Bian's transit through the continental U.S. in 
August.  But the deal has already fallen through.  Now no one in 
Washington is willing to run the risks of infuriating Bush and 
sending the case [of Chen's planned transit] to Bush's desk. ... 
U.S. TRIP, TAIWAN'S UN BID 
 
Given such circumstances, what else can Hsieh do?" 
 
¶4. Taiwan's UN Bid 
 
A) "New United Nations Bid a Foolish as well as Futile Move" 
 
An editorial in the pro-unification, English-language "China Post" 
[circulation: 30,000] wrote (7/28): 
 
"The rejection of the application for U.N. membership under Taiwan 
as the official name was a development that President and his team 
knew very well would happen when they submitted the proposal. Both 
the United Nations and mainland China would be firmly opposed to it. 
 All those who are well acquainted with the DPP's character and 
President Chen's propensity must be aware of the real motive behind 
the recent attempt to achieve U.N. membership. A series of important 
elections are looming on the island. Their results will have a major 
bearing on the destinies of the ruling party and the opposition. The 
DPP, which has been pushing Taiwan independence over the years, has 
been relying on divisive tactics to win votes. 
 
"The DPP has been impotent as the ruling party. Most of the economic 
and social problems plaguing the island have been as serious as 
ever. Some of them have grown worse. The island has declined 
economically while the other Asian Tigers -- Singapore, Hong Kong 
and South Korea -- have progressed.  The ruling party is therefore 
trying to spread the idea that it is the defender of the interests 
of the Taiwanese and that its political opponent is selling out the 
island to the Chinese mainland.  The DPP was thinking of the 
outcomes of the upcoming elections when it was applying for U.N. 
membership. Its purpose was to arouse anti-China sentiment among 
voters. 
How much anti-China feeling has been aroused by the failed attempt 
is unclear. However, it is certainly true that Taiwan has been 
embarrassed and shamed by this foolish act." 
 
B) "Don't Give Up on a UN Bid that is Clearly Fair" 
 
Li To-tzu, a legislative assistant, opined in the pro-independence, 
English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 30,000] (7/29): 
 
"... It was interesting that [UN Secretary-General] Ban used the [UN 
2758] resolution, which he said had already decided the question of 
Chinese representation, to reject Taiwan's application. Taiwan has 
two points to protest.  First, countries applying to enter the UN as 
new members notify the secretary-general as a courtesy. The 
secretary-general is not authorized to reject it. 
 
SIPDIS 
 
"Second, Taiwan applied as a new member, thereby avoiding the 
question of representing China. The resolution that Ban cited 
applies to the question of who represents China, not the question of 
who represents Taiwan.  Based on these two points, Taiwan should 
extend the battle lines in its effort to join the UN. The ultimate 
goal would be to reach an international arbitration court to fight a 
lawsuit over Taiwan's position, and confirm that the resolution has 
no binding power over questions not concerning the right to 
represent China. ..." 
 
C) "Chen Wants to Practice Law" 
 
An editorial in the pro-unification, English-language "China Post" 
[circulation: 30,000] wrote (7/30): 
 
"With his second and last term coming to an end in less than a year, 
President Chen Shui-bian seems planning to practice law in the 
United States. ...  The case in question is China versus the U.S. 
In meeting members of the Congressional Black Caucus at his office, 
President Chen charged the People's Republic of China with violating 
the Taiwan Relations Act in 1979.  ... 
 
"... With due respect, we wish to point out President Chen, who is 
one of Taiwan's best defense lawyers, has no grounds to indict the 
People's Republic of China in any U.S. court of law for violation of 
the Taiwan Relations Act, which is a domestic law the Congress 
forced upon Jimmy Carter's administration following the severance of 
diplomatic ties between Washington and Taipei at the beginning of 
¶1979. ... The concern and aims expressed in the TRA do not forbid 
Beijing to obstruct Taiwan's readmission to the WHO and the UN. 
..." 
 
YOUNG