Cablegate: Media Reaction: Cross-Strait Relations

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

060854Z Sep 05

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TAIPEI 003674

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/RSP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - ROBERT
PALLADINO
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS

1. Summary: Major Chinese-language Taipei dailies focused
their coverage September 3 - 6 on Council of Labor Affairs
Chairwoman Chen Chu's attempt to resign from her current
position, and efforts to secure the release of crewmen
aboard three Taiwan fishing boats being detained by Somali
militias.

2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an editorial in
the "China Times" said it is evident that recognizing
Chinese mainland academic qualifications should not be
viewed as a government issue for democratic Taiwan. "Taiwan
Daily," on the other hand, ran an editorial that argued that
the matter involves not only Taiwan's sovereignty, but
national identity as well.

3. The pro-independence "Taiwan Daily" said in its
editorial that KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou proposal for a
`Direct Link Timetable' shows that he is intent on appeasing
China. The pro-independence "Liberty Times" editorialized
that Ma dreams about cross-Strait peace but has no plans to
defend Taiwan. The pro-status quo, English-Language "China
Post" ran an editorial that stated Taiwan needs arms to
deter China from attacking the island.

4. The "Liberty Times" editorialized that China cannot
prove to the world that the country is seeking peace while
the country has deployed more than 700 missiles aimed at
Taiwan. The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei
Times" said in its editorial that China should first remove
these missiles in order to seek peace across the Taiwan
Strait. End summary.

1. "Does the President Need to Deal With China's Academic
Qualifications"

The centrist, pro-status quo "China Times" [circulation:
400,000] editorialized (09/06) that:

"For years, DPP and TSU political figures have said they
don't want any contact with China. Consequently, they don't
intend to recognize Chinese academic qualifications. But
what are the consequences? Maybe they have never figured
this out? In fact, whether the authorities recognize
Chinese academic qualifications or not will influence only
the public sector, but not the private one. ."

". [T]he United States has the most first-rate higher
educational system in the world, and the U.S. government has
never attempted to `recognize' diplomas. It is evident that
recognizing academic qualifications is not a necessary duty
for a democratic country, and there is no need to have a
president speak in a threatening way at the front line. ."

2. "Based on the Insistence of National Sovereignty and
National Identity [of Taiwan], China's Academic
Qualifications Should Not Get Recognized"

The pro-independence, "Taiwan Daily" [circulation: 100,000]
carried in its editorial (09/06) that:

" . [I]f the government recognizes China's academic
qualifications, it involves a deeper issue concerning
national identity, and not merely [the issue of] the
survival of Taiwan universities. .

" . [I]n China, universities are ideological state machines,
which lack in the space for liberal thoughts and independent
judgments. Regarding the issue of unification or
independence, China would not allow [in its schools any]
opinions that would lead to secession from China. Taiwan
students who study in China have to accept the ordinary
professionalism as well as the brain-washing education
featuring `Chinese nationalism.' .

"Moreover, China has greatly loosened the criteria of
enrollment in recent years for the necessity of `United
Front' tactics to attract Taiwan students and Taiwan
businessmen's children. . This has jeopardized the
credibility of Chinese academic qualifications. ."

3. "Ma Ying-jeou's Proposal of `Direct Link Timetable'
Demonstrates He Is Appeasing China and Not Putting Taiwan
Sovereignty and the People's Interest First"

The pro-independence, "Taiwan Daily" [circulation: 100,000]
said in its editorial (9/4) that:

". The fact that Ma Ying-jeou chose foreign media to
publicly announce the KMT's `timetable for cross-Strait
exchanges' highlights that Ma is full of ambition toward the
2008 presidential election. It also shows that the Pan-Blue
Camp has turned its China policy into substantive moves.
That is why the `cross-Strait timetable' has been set. Ma
Ying-jeou's proposal will result in Taiwan's restraining
itself and losing its bargaining chips. Such an
announcement of `peace by surrender' will certainly make
China very happy. But it is disadvantageous for Taiwan's
sustainable development. Taiwan will lose all its favorable
conditions for negotiations. We believe that the people of
Taiwan will not accept this. ."

4. "The Question Being Which Side Is Chairman Ma Taking?"

The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 600,000]
noted in its editorial (9/5):

". Some time ago, there were people who promoted the theory
that `cross-Strait peace would relieve people from military
services.' Now, according to [KMT] Chairman Ma [Ying-
jeou]'s thinking, there seems to be the implication that
`cross-Strait peace would relieve Taiwan from military
purchases.' Although cross-Strait peace is not a bad thing,
has China ever promised not to resort to military forces
against Taiwan? Would China be willing to recognize Taiwan
as a sovereign nation? If Lien Chan's being [brainwashed]
of unification during his visit to China can be seen as
greatly reducing hostility, then there will be hardly any
difference between that kind of cross-Strait peace and
Taiwan's surrendering.."

5. "China's Rise Is Inevitable, Taiwan's Absorption Is Not"

The status-quo, English-language "China Post" [circulation:
30,000] editorialized (09/06) that:

". It is unrealistic to think that Taiwan can match the
military opening of a rising superpower, but it can deter an
attack - deterrence is the prime aim of military power,
rather than to winning a directory victory. For this
reason, those in power - both the ruling party and the
opposition - should consider carefully their attitude to
offers by the United States of military equipment to boost
the deterrent value of Taiwan's military forces. Many
observers outside of Taiwan are convinced that the `Pan-
Blue' camp is simply playing politics of the worst sort in
its opposition to the purchase of military equipment from
the United States. Saying that China will never attack
Taiwan is a delusion. Making an attack too expensive to
contemplate will effectively deter China's use of military
power against Taiwan.

"The rise of China's power is inevitable, but Taiwan's
absorption by the communist power is not."

6. "The White Paper That Is Like a Liar's Words"

The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 600,000]
editorialized (9/3):

". For Taiwan, the [recent Chinese military] White Paper is
like an open book of lies. A democratic Taiwan means no
threat to Communist China at all. Yet China has deployed
700 missiles against Taiwan across the Strait. If this is
called `no intention of hegemony,' are the people of Taiwan
not being making fun of? What's more, Taiwan's seeking [to
build] its missile defense is nothing but to try to humbly
protecting itself under the missile intimidation [from
China]. However, China is working on the United States to
try to block Taiwan's building its minimum self-defense
capability. The United States, of course, will not buy it.
Not only did the United States and Japan include the
stability of the Taiwan Strait as one of the goals of common
concern in early 2005, but the United States will not agree
with the White Paper, which puts Taiwan into China's
exclusive domain.."

7. "China's Credibility Gap"

The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times"
[circulation: 30,000] carried in its editorial (09/06) that:

"Ahead of Chinese President Hu Jintao's expected visit to
the US, Beijing has issued a white paper entitled Endeavors
for Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-Proliferation. The
paper points out that the Taiwan question involves China's
core interests, and that action by the US to provide help or
protection to Taiwan would `erode trust between big powers.'
.

". Taiwan is not a threat to the Chinese Communist Party,
but this has not prevented Beijing from targeting over 700
missiles at it. This totally contradicts the white paper's
assertion that `China will never seek hegemony or be the
first to use nuclear weapons.'

"Taiwan naturally needs to seek missile defense, as this is
a legitimate matter of self-defense. Rather than putting so
much effort into obstructing Taiwan's inclusion under a
missile defense umbrella, China should simply remove the
missiles targeting Taiwan and declare the Taiwan Strait a
demilitarized zone. This would be a way of proving that it
wants to resolve the cross-strait issue peacefully.

"If China seeks a peaceful resolution to the cross-strait
issue, all the countries of the world will see that China
indeed is not seeking hegemony, and that its rise is indeed
peaceful."

KEEGAN

© Scoop Media