VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #1306/01 3090827
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 050827Z NOV 09
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2628
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 9473
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 0887

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 001306 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/P, EAP/PD - THOMAS HAMM 
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S. BEEF IMPORTS TO TAIWAN 
 
¶1. Summary:  Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news 
coverage November 5 on Premier Wu Den-yih, who was reported to have 
traveled abroad with a local criminal gang leader in 2008; on the 
controversy and aftermath of the Taiwan government's decision to 
allow the import of U.S. beef and beef products; and on developments 
in cross-Strait relations. 
 
¶2. Editorials and op-ed pieces in Taiwan's dailies continued to 
focus on the controversy caused by U.S. beef imports.  An op-ed in 
the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" alleged that the Ma 
administration's decision to allow U.S. beef imports was a move to 
compensate the United States for keeping quiet about a series of 
actions by the Ma administration to damage human rights in Taiwan. 
An editorial in the KMT-leaning "China Times" said the Legislative 
Yuan's move to amend the law to block the import of U.S. beef offal 
and ground beef has shown disrespect to the United States and will 
create risks in future U.S.-Taiwan relations.  A separate "China 
Times" op-ed piece said the U.S. beef controversy is no longer an 
issue about food safety but an extension of nationalistic awareness, 
after the WTO talks, to oppose opening Taiwan's market to any 
imported agricultural products.  An editorial in the China-focused 
"Want Daily," however, criticized a statement recently issued by the 
Office of U.S. Trade Representative and U.S. Department of 
Agriculture on U.S. beef imports to Taiwan.  The article said 
Washington has put additional pressure on the Ma administration, 
which has been trying its utmost to defend U.S. beef imports, and 
the move does not meet the interests of Taiwan and the United 
States.  An editorial in the pro-independence, English-language 
"Taipei Times" lambasted the Ma administration's opaque and 
peremptory handling the U.S. beef imports and said the same model 
will likely be applied when Taiwan talks with China about an 
Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement.  End summary. 
 
A) "U.S. Beef, Taiwan's Human Rights" 
 
Huang Chi-yao, a visiting researcher at the Max-Planck Institute, 
opined in the mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 520,000] 
(11/5): 
 
"... First, the major problem with the 'Protocol on U.S. Beef 
Imports to Taiwan' is that the Ma administration has unexpectedly 
handed the right over the health of its people to another country. 
[The Ma administration] has surprisingly handed [the right over to] 
the United States to determine whether the imported [U.S.] beef 
[carries the risk of] mad cow disease, abandoning the line of 
defense for the safety [of its people] by merely saying that 
[Taiwan] will stop importing [the U.S. beef] should any such disease 
cases be uncovered.  [The move] is akin to [allowing others to] run 
experiments on the living bodies [of the Taiwan people] while there 
is no preventive mechanism set up in advance. ... What's even worse 
is that Taiwan does not have the right to determine and call a halt 
to the beef imports! 
 
"... Therefore, if [we are to] talk about opening [Taiwan's market 
to U.S. beef], it has to be the United States that provides evidence 
showing that its exported beef carries no disease, which will then 
be examined and verified by Taiwan before it is allowed to be 
imported. ... Also, based on Taiwan's public health concerns, Taiwan 
has the right to ban any beef imports that carry the risk of 
contracting mad cow disease. ...  Basically, the Ma administration's 
premeditated decision to allow the import of U.S. beef was a move to 
compensate the United States for keeping quiet about a series of 
actions taken since Ma assumed office to damage [Taiwan's] 
administrative and judicial human rights.  In that vein, the 
decision to open Taiwan's market to U.S. beef was also made at the 
expense of harming Taiwan's human rights, which will hardly win 
emotional recognition from the Taiwan people and will therefore 
affect its marketing on the island.  As such, the resolution lies in 
a stronger push for the Ma administration to improve [Taiwan's] 
human rights and rectify its China-tilting policy.  Only when 
democracy and human rights are realized [in Taiwan] can the value of 
U.S. beef be truly demonstrated!" 
 
B) "Be Careful Not to Get Stuck in a Situation 'from Which There Is 
No Easy Retreat'" 
 
The KMT-leaning "China Times" [circulation: 120,000] editorialized 
(11/5): 
 
"... Even though the talks this time over the import of U.S. beef 
offal and ground beef had been going on for seventeen months, [the 
Ma administration] has failed to properly communicate with the 
legislative body before it made the final decision.  Even 
high-ranking decision-making officials in the Executive Yuan were 
kept in the dark.  Anything that [the Ma administration] did after 
that to try to fix the problem already seemed farfetched.  Lawmakers 
across party lines have all joined together to seek to amend the law 
to block the import of U.S. beef offal and ground beef.  [Such a 
development] has not only slapped the face of the [Taiwan] 
 
representatives [talking with the United States] but has also shown 
disrespect to the big boss the United States.  Surely this will 
create some risks in terms of Taiwan-U.S. relations in the future. 
..." 
 
C) "Different Decision-making Models, but Same Predicament" 
 
Chan Shou-chung, a former congressional aide, opined in the 
KMT-leaning "China Times" [circulation: 120,000] (11/5): 
 
"... It is a fact well-know to everyone that opening Taiwan's market 
to U.S. beef is one of the agricultural products that Taiwan has to 
sacrifice in the wake of Taiwan's participation in the World Trade 
Organization (WTO).  The controversy over U.S. beef is no longer a 
matter about food safety or [lack of] communication about 
[government] policies.  Instead, it is an extension of nationalistic 
awareness, after the WTO talks, to oppose opening [Taiwan's market] 
to any [imported] agricultural products, and this is the same case 
for Taiwan, Japan and South Korea.  ... Nonetheless, as long as 
[Taiwan imposes] limitations, the U.S. pressure to open [the Taiwan 
market] will remain constant, and 'full opening' is a decision that 
will have to be made sooner or later. ..." 
 
D) "The United States Should Learn from Hu Jintao's Political 
Wisdom" 
 
The China-focused "Want Daily" [circulation: 10,000] editorialized 
(11/5): 
 
"The U.S. Trade Representative Office (USTR) and the U.S. Department 
of Agriculture (DOA) said the other day that the United States has 
started to review whether Taiwan's measures to examine the imports 
[of U.S. beef] are consistent with the 'Protocol on U.S. Beef 
Imports to Taiwan' and with relevant international standards.  Given 
that the [Taiwan] government's decision to expand U.S. beef imports 
has become a political issue, the U.S. move was akin to making a bad 
situation worse, putting more pressure on President Ma Ying-jeou. 
Judging from the bigger picture of the Asia-Pacific, Washington's 
additional pressure on the Ma administration has not only failed to 
meet Taiwan's interests but also those of the Taiwan Strait and the 
United States. ... 
 
"... [USTR's] statement sounds mild, but in fact it carries the 
meaning of a threat.  It states very clearly that [Washington] will 
put pressure on the Ma administration, and it has the sense that the 
United States will retaliate as long as [Taiwan] fails to cease 
[imposing] the 'additional domestic measures.' ...  Also, the USTR 
and DOA's statement on the controversy of U.S. beef is not kind and 
considerate to the Ma administration, which has been trying its 
utmost to defend the expanded imports of U.S. beef. ... 
 
"Finally, the Ma administration's grand strategy toward Taiwan, the 
United States and China is to strengthen trade and economic 
relations with mainland China on the one hand and, on the other, to 
reinforce the United States' security commitment toward Taiwan.  The 
U.S. beef is a non-traditional safety issue, and of course it is 
very important, but it should not harm the normal development of 
Taiwan-U.S.-China relations.  In terms of the Dalai Lama's recent 
visit to Taiwan, even though Beijing was displeased, it did not vent 
its anger against the Ma administration which offered the Dalai Lama 
a visa.  Perhaps the Obama administration should learn from the 
political wisdom of [Chinese President] Hu Jintao." 
 
E) "Can ECFA Negotiations Be Trusted?" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 
30,000] editorialized (11/5): 
 
"The government's atrocious handling of the expansion of US beef 
imports -- opaque, peremptory and confused, regardless of the merits 
of the products -- is becoming a real cause for concern in terms of 
the bigger picture: cross-strait detente, and particularly a 
proposed economic pact with China. ...  One legacy of the US beef 
controversy is that many more people have little or no confidence in 
the government's ability to negotiate with China without 
jeopardizing Taiwan's interests.  Case in point No. 1: Department of 
Health Minister Yaung Chih-liang had promised that only US bone-in 
beef would be allowed into the country. But it turned out the 
protocol with the US also allowed ground beef, intestines, brains 
and spinal cords. ... 
 
"In an attempt to ease anger at the relaxation of US beef imports, 
the government said it would implement strict safety checks to 
ensure that imports are not contaminated. This rather tricky -- not 
to mention ad hoc -- approach to administrative duties can only 
prompt doubts as to whether an ECFA would trigger a range of policy 
U-turns and last-minute, superficial customs-control measures -- and 
all in the absence of adequate information for the public, let alone 
a public consensus.  Case in point No. 2: Premier Wu Den-yih said 
 
the signing of any cross-strait agreements, including an ECFA, would 
respect the need for public support and legislative oversight. But 
if the government can act in obvious defiance of a legislative 
resolution passed in 2006 that required the Department of Health to 
report in detail to the legislature before lifting bans on US beef, 
what is to be made of such commitments from the premier? 
 
"On Oct. 23, the department announced that Taiwan had signed an 
accord with the US agreeing to relax curbs on US bone-in beef and 
cow organs. Yet, as of yesterday, a majority of the public is being 
kept in the dark on the details of the protocol because the 
government has not issued a Chinese translation. Once again, this 
cavalier attitude toward ordinary people only raises suspicion as to 
how open and trustworthy any agreements between this China-friendly 
government and Beijing will be.  The government set a precedent of 
obliviousness by suddenly easing bans on US beef imports without due 
preparation and public consultation. This sorry episode is now 
signaling the need to place sustained pressure on the government to 
keep its ECFA dealings transparent. Otherwise, the next sudden 
announcement from the government might be a very destructive one, 
indeed." 
 
STANTON