VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHIN #1416/01 3360952
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 020952Z DEC 09
FM AIT TAIPEI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2844
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 9552
RUEHHK/AMCONSUL HONG KONG 0945

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 001416 
 
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: PRESIDENT OBAMA'S CHINA VISIT, PRESIDENT 
OBAMA'S ADDRESS ON AFGHANISTAN 
 
¶1. Summary:  Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused news 
coverage December 2 on the city mayors' and county magistrates' 
elections around the island, which are scheduled to be held on 
December 5, and on the sudden resignation of Japan's representative 
to Taiwan.  Several papers also reported on U.S. President Barack 
Obama's scheduled address at West Point Wednesday morning to reveal 
his plan for Afghanistan. 
 
¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, a column in the 
mass-circulation "Apple Daily" discussed President Obama's recent 
visit to China and said few people, not even AIT Chairman Raymond 
Burghardt, really understand the whole picture of Obama's China 
visit.  An op-ed in the pro-independence, English-language "Taipei 
Times," written by former AIT Chairman Nat Bellocchi, urged 
Washington to "make crystal clear that Taiwan's sovereignty and 
territorial integrity should not be infringed upon in any way, so 
that the people of Taiwan can make a free decision on their future." 
 A separate "Taipei Times" op-ed also discussed Obama's first trip 
to China, saying that "what he did achieve looks superficial, while 
what he gave up seems substantial."  With regard to President 
Obama's address on Afghanistan Wednesday morning, a column in the 
KMT-leaning "China Times" described it as Obama's most important 
address on the United States' foreign affairs and national security 
and his most controversial policy declaration since he assumed 
office.  The article lamented that, even though Obama's campaign 
slogan was "change," his Afghanistan policy showed that all he can 
do is follow the course laid down by his predecessor.  End summary. 
 
¶3. President Obama's China Visit 
 
A) "Taiwan Card, Iran Card" 
 
James Tu, the publisher of "Apple Daily," wrote in his column in the 
mass-circulation "Apple Daily" [circulation: 540,000] (12/2): 
 
"[U.S. President Barack] Obama's [recent] trip to China was 
ridiculed by the U.S. media as having returned [to the United 
States] empty-handed, but, as it stands now, it may not necessarily 
be the case.  During an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 
meeting held in Geneva last Friday on how to deal with Iran's 
nuclear programs, both China and Russia voted in favor of censuring 
Iran. ... The outside world knows very little about the details of 
Obama's visit to China, and many of the talks are still in progress; 
even AIT Board [sic] Chairman Raymond Burghardt may not be able to 
grasp the whole picture.  Even though China agrees that the IAEA 
should censure Iran now, it does not mean it will agree with the 
United Nations to impose sanctions against Iran, or the way the 
United States and Europe will impose those sanctions in the future. 
But judging from the fact that Obama's attitude toward Iran has 
turned anxious and impatient, and from the change in China's policy, 
there is no reason for Taiwan to feel good about itself.  One cannot 
help but sweat over the new round of haggling between Washington and 
Beijing!" 
 
B) "What Was Said and What Should Have Been" 
 
Nat Bellocchi, former AIT Chairman and a special adviser of the 
Liberty Times Group, opined in the pro-independence, 
English-language "Taipei Times" [circulation: 30,000] (12/2): 
 
"US President Barack Obama's trip to China continues to be the 
subject of hot debate in Western media. ...  The Obama team seems to 
have been too eager to 'create a positive atmosphere' to encourage 
China to go along on a number of undeniably important issues, such 
as global warming, environmental protection, North Korea and Iran. 
In doing so, it allowed the Chinese leaders to outmaneuver the 
Americans.  This occurred not only in terms of information control 
surrounding public events -- such as the 'town hall meeting' with a 
programmed audience of Communist League Youth members in Shanghai -- 
but also in terms of substantial issues relating to both Tibet, East 
Turkestan and Taiwan. 
 
"For Taiwan, the biggest setback of the visit was the mention in the 
US-China Joint Statement of 'sovereignty and territorial integrity.' 
Chinese President Hu Jintao said during the joint press conference 
that the Chinese side appreciated the statements by Obama that 'the 
US side ... respects China's sovereignty and territorial integrity 
when it comes to the Taiwan question and other matters.'  Not 
unexpectedly, government-controlled Chinese media, such as Xinhua 
news agency and the China Daily, immediately reported that Obama 
recognizes China's sovereignty and territorial integrity on Taiwan 
and other issues.  If that is what Beijing believes was said, the 
Obama administration may want to clarify that this is in direct 
contradiction of US policy, which holds that Taiwan's status must be 
determined peacefully and with the assent/consent of Taiwanese. That 
is the essence of what was laid down in 1979 in the Taiwan Relations 
Act (TRA) and in 1982 in the Six Assurances.  The problem is that 
there is significant tension between the TRA and the Three 
OBAMA'S ADDRESS ON AFGHANISTAN 
 
Communiqus, the main one being that the TRA represents the US side 
of the deal as prescribed by Congress, while the Three Communiqus 
represent what China wanted. 
 
"In light of the changing situation in Asia, how the US deals with a 
small, democratic Taiwan on the one side and an increasingly 
assertive -- and important -- giant on the other will require 
careful planning.  It would be a grave mistake, however, if we 
allowed Taiwan's existence as a free and democratic country to be 
held hostage or to be whittled away by the rulers in Beijing. 
Taiwanese have worked hard to achieve their democracy.  It is 
essential that the US make crystal clear that Taiwan's sovereignty 
and territorial integrity should not be infringed upon in any way, 
so that the people of Taiwan can make a free decision on their 
future." 
 
C) "Obama Was Outwitted by Beijing" 
 
Zhang Wei, a lecturer in Chinese economy at Cambridge University, 
opined in the pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" 
[circulation: 30,000] (12/2): 
 
"US President Barack Obama's first trip to China was like a splendid 
stage play.  The performance was long rehearsed in both Washington 
and Beijing, because both governments needed at least the appearance 
of a successful visit.  The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) needed 
Obama's unequivocal endorsement of China's increasingly important 
international role in order to buttress its domestic legitimacy. 
The US needed China's cooperation to demonstrate the effectiveness 
of Obama's new strategy of collaborative global leadership.  Now 
that the play is over and the applause has died down, it is time to 
check the balance sheet and see how much Obama achieved and how much 
he conceded. 
 
"On the positive side of the ledger, Obama received ceremonial 
treatment not normally accorded to visiting foreign leaders, even 
other visiting US presidents, demonstrating the importance China's 
government attached to the visit. ...  Obama also initially appeared 
to make some progress in giving voice to the universal values of 
human rights and democracy.  He met with students in Shanghai in his 
favorite 'town hall' format, which allowed for face-to-face 
discussions with young Chinese.  Moreover, China's government 
allowed the Nanfang Zhoumo, the country's most liberal newspaper, to 
conduct a 12-minute exclusive interview with Obama. ... 
 
"And the negative side of the ledger?  Obama gave up two things that 
have usually been at the top of the agenda when US presidents meet 
with Chinese leaders.  First, Obama did not openly criticize the 
Chinese government's notorious human rights record, nor did he use 
his influence to persuade China to release any prisoner of 
conscience, as his US predecessors always did when visiting the 
country. ...  Second, Obama did not seriously seek to resolve 
existing US-China economic disagreements, particularly over trade. 
...  So, on balance, Obama's first trip to China achieved relatively 
little.  Moreover, what he did achieve looks superficial, while what 
he gave up seems substantial.  Of course, this is partly because of 
the changes in the relative economic and political power of the US 
and China over the past decade, and especially during the current 
global economic crisis.  However, the sizable deficit on the balance 
sheet of Obama's China trip could have been much lower if Obama had 
paid more attention to substance. It seems that Hu is more skillful 
than the polished Obama at maximizing his gains at little cost." 
 
¶4. President Obama's Address on Afghanistan 
 
"Sorrow of Obama" 
 
Columnist Lin Po-wen wrote in the KMT-leaning "China Times" 
[circulation: 120,000] (12/2): 
 
"Following more than two months' deliberation and ten high-ranking 
military meetings, [U.S. President Barack] Obama finally drew out 
his sword and decided to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to 
Afghanistan, increasing the total number of U.S. soldiers in 
Afghanistan to 100,000.  Obama chose to deliver his speech on 
sending more troops [to Afghanistan] at West Point, instead of 
hiding behind the Oval Office in the White House and talking to 
himself in front of the camera, because this is his most important 
address on U.S. foreign affairs and national security and his most 
controversial policy declaration since he took over the helm.  He 
needs [to deliver it at] a historical site, and by speaking to 
thousands of students and soldiers, he will be able to bring his 
articulateness into full play and achieve the highest goal of 
convincing the American people. 
 
"One can tell Obama's personality, mentality and his limitations 
from his lengthy decision-making process.  During his campaign, 
Obama rolled out the most resounding and attractive slogan -- 
OBAMA'S ADDRESS ON AFGHANISTAN 
 
'change' to the voters.  But when it comes to his Afghanistan 
policy, it has ruthlessly been demonstrated that he is unable to 
'change;' all he can do is follow the course laid down by his 
predecessor, or even adding more mistakes to it.  Just like [former 
U.S.] President Lyndon Johnson during the Vietnam War era, who 
allowed the commanders on the frontline of the battle, the Pentagon 
and a bunch of hawks to lead him by the nose, this [decision] will 
be the sorrow for Obama and a tragedy for the United States. .... 
 
"... The dove presidential candidate, Obama, has transformed into 
hawk President Obama, who would rather offend the liberals, most of 
whom are anti-war, and a few anti-war conservatives than seek 
'change' in the Afghanistan battlefield.  All he can do is to add 
more [mess] to the mess left behind by [President George W.] Bush 
and [Vice President Dick] Cheney by continuing to send young 
Americans to die in the gloomy valleys of Central Asia.  Obama 
stressed that he is sending more troops in exchange for gradually 
withdrawing the U.S. military from the battlefield.  This is just 
daydreaming -- the United States will only send more U.S. troops [to 
Afghanistan] and get stuck, and more U.S. soldiers will die. 
 
"The United States has spent one trillion U.S. dollars in Iraq, and 
it will cost Washington at least 300 billion U.S. dollars each year 
for the war in Afghanistan.  The United States, which is suffering 
from the economic downturn and rising unemployment rates, will very 
likely be pulled down by the war in Afghanistan. ...  The United 
States is stuck in the meaningless quagmire of the Afghanistan war, 
while China, India and Brazil are developing their economies with 
all their strength.  It is no wonder that the U.S. national strength 
has been slipping downhill, and Obama is just another pushover that 
only engages in empty talk!" 
 
STANTON