VZCZCXYZ0009
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #2619/01 3522318
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 182318Z DEC 07
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7618
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 7551
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 8825

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 002619 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - NIDA EMMONS 
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 and English-language 
dailies gave significant reporting and editorial coverage December 
15-18 to the exposure of the contents of a conversation between AIT 
Chairman Raymond Burghardt and KMT vice presidential candidate 
Vincent Siew on December 8.  The pro-unification "United Daily News" 
front-paged a banner headline on December 15 that said "Burghardt 
and Siew Express Worries in a Secret Meeting That Bian [Will] Use 
Dirty Tricks to Disrupt the Elections." 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an analysis in the 
pro-independence "Liberty Times" discussed the exposed memorandum of 
conversation between Burghardt and Siew and slammed the KMT for 
conspiring with the United States to sell out Taiwan.  An editorial 
in the pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" criticized 
the lack of parity in Washington's dealings with the KMT.  Both an 
editorial and a commentary in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" 
said the exposed secret document will do harm to the KMT camp.  A 
separate "Apple Daily" op-ed said Washington is more worried about 
martial law in Taiwan than the UN referendum.  An editorial in the 
centrist, KMT-leaning "China Times" discussed the United States' 
mistrust of President Chen Shui-bian, while a "United Daily News" 
editorial said the UN referendum will give Chen a leverage to put 
Taiwan's new presidential and its political situation on a short 
leash.  An editorial in the conservative, pro-unification, 
English-language "China Post" said Burghardt's trip "marked a 
watershed in Washington's dealing with Chen and the ruling DPP." 
End summary. 
 
A) "Betraying Taiwan's Voters and Opening its [KMT] Heart with the 
United States?" 
 
Deputy Editor-in-Chief Tsou Jiing-wen noted in the pro-independence 
"Liberty Times" [circulation: 720,000] (12/116): 
 
"The Ma Ying-jeou [KMT presidential candidate] camp has clarified 
[KMT vice presidential candidate Vincent]Siew's  way of speaking 
regarding the 'two-step' voting format, which is a typical style of 
'Teflon pot,' meaning 'nothing to do with me.'  The candidate and 
his running mate are a unit.  If Ma wants to set aside Siew['s 
remarks in the memocon], he has to reprimand Vincent Siew [and ask 
Siew] to deny that [Siew] had a tacit understanding with the United 
States on his own account.  But the circumstances are the opposite 
of this.  Siew confirmed that he has taken unverified rumors, the 
imaginary so-called 'dirty tricks,' to act like a spoiled brat and 
complain to the United States.  Do these talks and behavior mean 
that this [potential KMT government] will be a puppet regime?  Does 
Taiwan need such an authority that listens to orders and handles 
matters for others [such as the United States]? ... 
 
"The referendum of returning to the UN proposed by the KMT has been 
sent to the Central Election Committee.  Up until now, neither the 
party's central committee nor its candidates has explained to the 
general public why the referendum was proposed, and they arguments 
to encourage people to vote and show their support.  Instead, [the 
KMT] puts more emphasis on its insistence on the 'two-step' voting 
system than on explaining the content of its referendum [to return 
to the UN].  This is really a very weird phenomenon.  Now, in order 
to block the UN referendum, the truth was revealed.  This explains 
that the referenda on opposing corruption and returning to the UN 
are 'all fake' and are typical ways of cheating votes.  Does it mean 
that whether the referenda pass or not, the proposing party does not 
care at all? ... 
 
"Ma and Siew do not explain to several millions of voters who have 
worked hard to sign the signatures [to propose the referendum to 
join the UN].  Instead, they report to a foreign country's 
messenger.  Do they [Ma and Siew] put the people in their mind? 
They also put the United States, who has intervenes in Taiwan's 
internal affairs, and China, who instructs behind the U.S., as their 
colonial masters.  What if Ma and Siew were elected [as president 
and vice president], would it manifest the rumor that they will make 
Taiwan the sub-colony co-managed by China and the United States? 
[In such a case] [w]ill their roles be inferior to that of the chief 
executive? [Ed Note: title of the chief official of Chinese-ruled 
Hong Kong]  Taiwan had its first president directly elected by 
people in 1996.  Does it mean [Taiwan] will go backward to the 
election of chief executive with which the style is even inferior to 
that of an election by agent? ..." 
 
B) "Why Is the US Silent on the KMT?" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 
30,000] editorialized (12/15): 
 
"The US cannot be blamed for preferring one presidential ticket over 
another -- or one party dominating the legislature and not the 
other. But here is a question that US officials can ask themselves: 
Is the long-term damage that can be inflicted on Taiwan's national 
-- and regional -- stability and core democratic structures and 
 
practices from one-sided intervention worth the short-term political 
gain?  When Burghardt criticized Chen -- however undiplomatic his 
wording -- even Chen supporters could see beyond the reproachful 
tone. They could appreciate that Burghardt probably meant well, even 
if certain superiors at the State Department and the White House 
decidedly do not. 
 
"What these allies might not appreciate is the lack of parity in 
Washington's dealings with the KMT. Chen, for all his faults, has 
been scapegoated for most of his time as president over the 
obstructiveness of not only Beijing apparatchiks but also pro-China 
elements in the pan-blue camp.  And because most US officials are 
serenely ignorant of Taiwanese domestic politics and do not read 
Chinese, they do not understand that the balance of KMT efforts in 
the legislature has been to grind the Chen administration to a halt 
-- even while directly insulting the US -- and to hell with ordinary 
people caught up in the circus. ... 
 
"The US has been steadfast in its silence over the KMT's agenda of 
discrediting administrative systems. It therefore must be asked if 
anyone among serving US officials other than AIT Director Stephen 
Young has requisite understanding of these problems. 
It would have been gratifying if Burghardt had publicly warned Ma 
and Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng of the corrosive impact of 
denigrating public institutions for partisan gain. Perhaps Burghardt 
could have publicly discussed the instability that might follow a 
legislative run on the authority of executive agencies -- including 
holding entire budgets to ransom over the most trivial acts and 
shutting down entire systems of government. Or shutting down 
meaningful arms spending.  But no. None of this is publicly 
accountable.  We can only pray that this is not the kind of 
governance and leadership that Washington would wish for Taiwan -- 
or tolerate in the name of expediency." 
 
C) "Exposure of the Secret Document Harms Ma Ying-jeou" 
 
The mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 500,000] 
editorialized (12/17): 
 
"The exposure of the secret document [i.e. the memorandum of 
conversation] between [AIT Chairman] Raymond Burghardt and [KMT vice 
presidential candidate] Vincent Siew indicated that not only the DPP 
but also the KMT knows nothing about how to keep secret.  Even if 
the exposure were done by hackers, apparently neither of the two 
parties had been capable of fighting hackers.  What else can we 
expect from them? ... 
 
"In addition, Burghardt raised doubts to Siew with regard to Ma 
Ying-jeou's attitude toward the [U.S.] arms sales.  Burghardt also 
reminded Ma that, given Taiwan's insufficient military strength, 
talks between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait will be akin to 
talks of surrender.  This is exactly the gray area where Ma has been 
equivocating and keeping vague, thus providing people the 
opportunity to suspect whether Ma is pro-China.  Ma must no longer 
dodge the question and must make an honest and clear response to 
it." 
 
D) "Caught with One's Pants down" 
 
Columnist Antonio Chiang wrote in his column in the mass-circulation 
"Apple Daily" [circulation: 500,000] (12/18): 
 
"... In fact, the United States' understanding of Taiwan's situation 
may not necessarily be less comprehensive than that of local 
specialists.  The Americans' infiltration of Taiwan society is very 
thorough, and rarely is there any secret in Taiwan that they don't 
know.  AIT does a very solid study and investigation of Taiwan, and 
it keeps a thorough and detailed record of the words and deeds of 
every politician.  Normally it will come to no avail when either the 
ruling or opposition members try to strive for recognition or lay 
the blame on others in front of the Americans. ... 
 
"The [U.S.] arms sales is a major stumbling block for the KMT to 
seek the U.S. trust and improve Taipei-Washington ties.  Without 
sufficient defense capabilities on Taiwan's side, the cross-Strait 
talks will become talks of surrender.  Ma's close aides and the KMT 
strategists are still not vigilant or perceptive about this.  It 
would be more significant if the exposure of the secret document 
[between Burghardt and Siew] could get the KMT's attention. ..." 
 
E) "Burghardt Is Worried that Taiwan Will be in Chaos" 
 
Edward I-hsin Chen, a professor at the Institute of American Studies 
at Tamkang University , wrote an article in the op-ed of the 
mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 500,000] (12/15) 
 
"... The warning that the United States gives to Taiwan regarding 
martial law is definitely not making unfounded accusations.  [AIT 
Chairman]  Raymond Burghardt and [U.S. Deputy Secretary of State] 
 
Thomas Christensen obviously have noticed that, although Taiwan is 
not formally under martial law, the manifestation of it has come 
into existence in many aspects.  For example, with a search warrant 
in hand, the National Security Bureau, prosecutors and police 
dramatically raided the Shih-ying publisher and searched 
publications; Minister of National Defense Lee Tien-yu said that if 
the Legislative Yuan did not ratify martial law imposed by the 
president, the military force would still do whatever the president 
said and would send the 6th Army Corps to take over the Taipei City; 
the Ministry of Education unlawfully and forcibly tore down the 
plaque "Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall," which manner was seriously 
against the procedural justice.  All these examples have made the 
U.S. officials in Taiwan feel the withering atmosphere similar to 
that of imposing martial law. 
 
"The United States has been highly suspicious at the latest 
developments in Taiwan.  Not only these politicians and governmental 
offices' behavior lacks integrity, but also their unscrupulous 
attitudes reveal from their behavior and the ignorance and neglect 
regarding the value of democracy.  Their performance has been no 
different from that of a dictatorial country.  Obviously from the 
perspective of Washington D.C., Taiwan imposing martial law will be 
a worse circumstance than that of the UN referendum." 
 
F) "How Come That Dirty Campaigning Tricks Are Still Lingering?" 
 
The centrist, KMT-leaning "China Times" [circulation: 400,000] 
editorialized (12/18): 
 
"... It is a well-known fact that the DPP is very skilled at 
maneuvering and manipulating campaigns, and the one who is 
outstanding talented in doing so is Bian.  Washington's strong 
doubts about Chen Shui-bian do not start from today; neither were 
they exposed after the 'secret meeting between Burghardt and Siew.' 
Similar messages have been constantly passed on to Taiwan from the 
American people via direct or indirect channels since six month ago 
until Burghardt came to Taiwan personally and called on various 
ruling and opposition leaders one month prior to the legislative 
elections.  What on earth was he here for?  Burghardt is not someone 
who is 'unaware of Taiwan affairs;' as a major character during the 
1996 cross-Strait tension, the messages Burghardt brought with him 
and the issues he expressed concerns about have all represented 
certain significance. 
 
"During his departure press briefing, Burghardt said reservedly but 
directly that during his meeting with Chen, Chen had repeatedly 
reiterated his pledges.  One of the pledges that the United States 
attaches great importance to is that Chen guaranteed that the 
leadership can be transferred peacefully! ... 
 
"Given a government which is composed mainly of people studying in 
law but which can violate and toy with laws so easily, is there any 
thing else that can restrain or check and balance it?  Is there 
anything that a government which no one or nothing can restrain or 
check cannot do?  Does Chen have any dirty campaigning tricks after 
all?  Chen is the one who knows the answer best.  The Taiwan people 
had better open their eyes and watch clearly how many dirty tricks 
he has!" 
 
G) "Give the Pro-Green Voters a Reason to Oppose the UN Referendum" 
 
The pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 400,000] 
editorialized (12/15): 
 
"... Burghardt went right to the heart of the matter by pointing out 
frankly that the 'UN referendum' is 'one that Chen Shui-bian will 
use to put the new president and the political situation following 
the presidential election on a short leash.'  Chen said 'nothing 
will really happen in the wake of the UN referendum.'  Surely 
nothing will happen if what he referred to is that the island will 
become the 'Taiwan country' or that it can enter the UN following 
the UN referendum.  But the passage of the UN referendum will 
provide Chen with a topic and a leverage to put the new president 
and Taiwan's political situation on a short leash.  On the contrary, 
should the 'UN referendum' fail to pass, it will be akin to the 
Green camp casting a 'non-confidence' vote on Chen, so that he will 
no longer be able to put the DPP on a short leash.  Who said that 
'nothing will happen in the wake of the UN referendum?' ..." 
 
H) "Prescience or Inordinate Fear?" 
 
The conservative, pro-unification, English-language "China Post" 
[circulation: 30,000] editorialized (12/15): 
 
"It appears that the United States, Taiwan's only ally and 
supporter, is worried. Raymond Berghardt [sic], chairman of the 
American Institute in Taiwan, told the local press on Tuesday that 
his meeting with President Chen Shui-bian broached a number of 
issues, including Washington's concern about the 'peaceful transfer 
 
of power' after the upcoming election. ...  The question is 
certainly an affront to President Chen, who wraps himself in 
democracy. The fact that the AIT chairman briefed the local media on 
his meeting with Chen is a clear sign that Washington is unhappy 
about what Chen has been doing in his persistent push for Taiwan 
independence, in violation of his pledges to Washington and the 
international community. ... 
 
"While Mr. Berghardt [sic] failed in his mission to dissuade Chen 
from holding the referendum, his trip to Taiwan marked a watershed 
in Washington's dealing with Chen and the ruling Democratic 
Progressive Party. President Chen may have become a hero for radical 
separatists for having the guts ('LP' should be a better word) to 
say 'No' to Washington, but he has lost credibility and 
trustworthiness with his staunchest ally.  The fact that Mr. 
Berghardt [sic] did raise the issue of 'peaceful transfer of power' 
shows Washington's suspicion of Chen and its lack of trust in him. 
The lame duck president may not care about it at all, but the 
American diplomat's concern about the election should not be 
dismissed by Taiwan's people. 
 
Mr. Berghardt [sic] is by no means an alarmist. He knows Taiwan and 
knows what Chen and his party are capable of doing. Have you seen 
what the Central Election Commission is doing these days? They are 
trying to amend a 'postponement clause' to set conditions that would 
justify the postponement of elections, such as natural disasters or 
'force majeure.' What they are up to?  It seemed that Berghardt's 
worry is neither excessive nor inordinate. We should thank Mr. 
Berghardt for his prescient warning, just as Frank Hsieh, the DPP's 
presidential candidate, thanked the American friend for giving 
'warmth' to him by urging him to be 'his own man,' not to be led by 
the nose by a demagogue." 
 
YOUNG