Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 04TAIPEI3354 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 04TAIPEI3354 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | American Institute Taiwan, Taipei |
| Created: | 2004-10-27 08:28:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED |
| Tags: | OPRC KMDR KPAO TW Foreign Policy Cross Strait Politics |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TAIPEI 003354 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, Foreign Policy, Cross Strait Politics SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: SECRETARY POWELL'S VISIT TO CHINA AND U.S. POLICY A) "The United States Has Decided Not to Play the Marginal Game of Taiwan Independence Along with President Chen" The conservative, pro-unification "United Daily News" said in its editorial (10/27): "As the U.S. presidential election campaign entered its last week, Secretary of State Colin Powell disclosed in Beijing a new framework for U.S.-China policy. There are new elements in this framework. Some people in Washington believe it `has changed U.S. policy.' "From the perspective of the campaign, Powell appears to be telling American voters that the U.S. government will not get itself involved in any cross-Strait confrontations. From the perspective of policy, this indicates that the Bush administration is making an overall revision of its `unilaterialism,' including its China policy. ". In Powell's new framework, the U.S. `one-China' policy remains unchanged. His mentioning of `seeking peaceful reunification' also increased China's political profit. Therefore, the main pressure is on Taiwan. The United States believes the head of Taiwan's government is seeking Taiwan independence. But this is not in the interest of the United States and China. In other words, neither of them needs to make any changes under the new framework. The one that must change is the Taiwan authority. ." B) "Facilitating a Dialogue or Facilitating Unification?" An unsigned commentary in the pro-status quo "China Times" said (10/27): "Why has the United States changed its position from Bush's remarks of `sparing no effort to defend Taiwan' and the principle that `Taiwan's future should be decided with the consent of its people' into Powell's saying `Taiwan is not a sovereign state and the two sides across the Strait should move toward peaceful reunification'? "To speak frankly, Bush is not to blame. Imagine you are Bush. Just as you have been supporting Taiwan to the point of nearly clashing with China, Chen Shui-bian does not even inform you of his intention to hold referendum to help his re-election. When you send a secret envoy to Taiwan to mediate, he returns empty- SIPDIS handed. Under these circumstances, could you continue your support?" C) "The Words Are Ear-piercing; Taiwan Cannot Be Unalarmed; Powell's Remarks Indicate That There Is Less U.S. Ambiguity Toward Taiwan Independence; No Matter Whether U.S. Policy Has Changed, the Feeling of Interactions Have Been Different; Taipei Should Be More Sensitive" Washington Correspondent Nadia Tsao of the pro- independence "Liberty Times" noted (10/27): "Another issue which is worth noticing is that the atmosphere seems to be different between Taiwan and the Bush administration. Although the policy remains unchanged; the communication channels are still there; and the United States cannot `sell' Taiwan because of the North Korean issue, etc, some officials, including Powell, seem to believe that Taiwan has deliberately misunderstood U.S. policy or ignored U.S. thinking. This has increased U.S. difficulty in `managing' its cross-strait policy. "In the interviews, Powell openly praised China's diplomatic endeavors as maturing while having warned Taiwan many times [that it needed to act more maturely]. Even if Powell may not stay [in his position], whether this kind of thinking will become mainstream in the new Bush administration is something Taiwan can not overlook." D) "Taiwan's Independence is an Objective Fact; It Will Not Disappear Because of Negligence by Others; Lame- Duck Secretary of State Powell's Remarks in Beijing Disgraced the Taiwan People and Himself As Well" The pro-independence, "Taiwan Daily" editorialized (10/27): ". Everybody knows that Powell is almost certain to leave his position as Secretary of State even if Bush wins re-election. On all major international issues, Powell's viewpoints differ greatly from those of Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.. During the most heated time of the [election] campaign, when there seems to be no one in control in the White House, a lame-duck secretary of state went to China for his commencement trip. He said in press interviews several sentences that no one could tell there is anything new except those who know the subtle relationship between the United States, China, and Taiwan very well. The issue how should one interpret his remarks will certainly keep U.S., Chinese and Taiwan experts busy for some time. ." E) "Democracy, Yes; Sovereignty, No" A commentary by Academia Sinica research fellow Hsu Yung-ming in the pro-status quo "China Times" said (10/27): ". This frank statement [by Powell] seems to have broken the myth that many of us have had regarding Taiwan's democratic development: democracy does not mean sovereignty. Supporting Taiwan's democratization does not equal supporting the Taiwan people regarding being their own master. The U.S. treatment of Taiwan's position is not much better than Beijing's treatment of Hong Kong. At least Tung Chee Wah can go to Beijing. Can Chen Shui-bian go to Washington? "The DPP government should let the public know about the difference between being democratic and enjoying sovereignty. The Blue and the Green camps should express their positions toward this disconnect. . The main point is whether we want both democracy and sovereignty or can we tolerate democracy without sovereignty. There is no room for ambiguity any longer. ." F) "Poor Word Choice or a Policy Shift?" The pro-independence, English language, "Taipei Times" commented in an editorial (10/27): "U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Monday that Taiwan is not a sovereign and independent country. The question is: Is Powell really clear on what he is talking about? If the status of Taiwan really is what Powell claims it to be, then his statement could be interpreted as meaning either that sovereignty over Taiwan remains undetermined, as stated in the 1952 San Francisco Peace Treaty, or that Taiwan comes under the sovereignty of China. "The question of whether this China is the Republic of China (ROC) or the People's Republic of China (PRC) will surely lead to further dispute. To those interpreting Powell's statement as meaning that Taiwan belongs to the PRC, we can only say that this goes further than any of the communiqus signed by Washington and Beijing, and it is not consistent with the U.S.' position. ". When U.S. officials speak on the international stage about Taiwan's lack of national sovereignty, they clearly demonstrate how perilous Taiwan's situation is today -- even its closest friend finds itself unable to lend public support. "Only if Taiwanese show determination and are willing to defend themselves at any cost will they be able to avoid being swallowed up by China by one means or another. Beijing's most devious ploy is to get Taiwanese to take national defense lightly. "If Taiwan loses its military ability to oppose China's threats, what reason would Beijing have to sit down at the negotiating table to engage in substantive and meaningful talks with Taiwan? China would be able to threaten Taiwan militarily at any time -- and continue to do so until this nation surrenders. If this is a situation that the pan-blue camp finds intolerable, then they have no reason to oppose the arms-procurement budget that has turned the Legislative Yuan into a battleground. "Taiwan meets all the conditions for being a modern democratic nation, so Powell's comments about Taiwan not having sovereignty are a slap in the face. Unless the people of Taiwan are willing to face the same fate as the residents of Hong Kong and Macao, then there is only one thing they can do. They must convince the legislators they elected to represent them that Taiwan must equip itself with advanced weapons. The government must accelerate the development of a society sharing a strong sense of common identity. The people and the government must show their determined resistance to communist rule. This is a road that Taiwan has no choice but to follow." PAAL
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04