US embassy cable - 05TAIPEI2142

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TAIPEI 002142 
 
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, Cross Strait Politics 
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS 
 
 
1. Summary: Taiwan dailies continued May 12 to spend 
pages reporting on PFP Chairman James Soong's speech at 
Beijing's Tsinghua University Wednesday and his meeting 
with Chinese President Hu Jintao today.  The pro- 
unification "United Daily News" printed a banner 
headline on its front page that said "Soong and Hu will 
discuss the new contents of the 1992 Consensus today." 
The sub-headline added: "Conclusion of the meeting will 
be put into words and possibly issued in the form of a 
joint statement or a communiqu.  PFP suggested that a 
military buffer zone be set up [in the Taiwan Strait]. 
The Presidential Office rushed to deny the 1992 
Consensus yesterday."  The centrist "China Times" also 
carried a news story on its front page that read: 
"Soong-Hu meeting today will find a common ground for 
the contents of the 1992 Consensus."  The pro- 
independence "Taiwan Daily" headlined in its front 
page: "Soong and Hu will meet today; Bian and [former 
President] Lee [Teng-hui] will strike out," and its sub- 
headline said: "[Bian and Lee] will comment on the 
remarks and behaviors of Lien and Soong in China via a 
TV interview and an international press conference, 
respectively."   Taiwan's biggest daily, the pro- 
independence "Liberty Times," however, reported on its 
second page the Presidential Office's response to 
Soong's speech and his meeting with Hu today, which 
headlined: "Presidential Office: Soong has overstepped 
the consensus reached between Bian and Soong." 
 
2. Several newspapers editorialized on Lien's and 
Soong's speeches in China.  The "Liberty Times" 
editorial said Lien and Soong have disparaged Taiwan's 
most valuable assets of democracy and freedom, while 
the "Taiwan Daily" gave a higher evaluation of Soong's 
speech than Lien Chan's but criticized him for ruling 
out the independence option for the Taiwan people.  The 
"United Daily News" editorial elaborated on Soong's 
speech and called for a common vision for both sides of 
the Taiwan Strait.  A "China Times" news analysis 
discussed the Soong-Hu meeting today, noting that they 
can hardly find common ground because Chen has clearly 
denied in public any possibility to accept the 1992 
Consensus.  A limited-circulation, pro-independence 
English-language "Taipei Times" editorial commented on 
Taiwan's China fever and the recent inter-party strife 
of the DPP, asking if the United States is satisfied to 
see Taiwan bleeding and China gloating.  End summary. 
 
A) "Lien and Soong Must Not Produce an Erroneous 
Tragedy of Political Marriage" 
 
The pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 
800,000] editorialized (5/12): 
 
"The visit to China by [KMT Chairman] Lien Chan, 
followed by that of [PFP Chairman] James Soong, has 
generated a China fever in Taiwan.  Such a fever has 
not only undermined the anti-Communism values that have 
been cultivated in Taiwan over the past few decades but 
has jeopardized the foundation of Taiwan's democracy. 
In other words, it seems on the surface that Lien and 
Soong, who visited China in the capacity of opposition 
leaders and thus have no right to sign any agreement 
with China, will not be able to sell out Taiwan.  But 
in reality, their trips are an echo of the waves of 
China's nationalism and patriotism and a move to 
disparage Taiwan's most valuable system and spiritual 
assets of democracy and freedom.  People in the know 
are deeply concerned that the power of such an approach 
to strike a blow to Taiwan, which is tantamount to an 
invisible way to sell out Taiwan, will be even stronger 
than that of guns and missiles. ." 
 
B) "Taiwan Consciousness Is the Sentiment to Identify 
with the People and Soil of Taiwan; This Can Only Be 
Secured by Independent Sovereignty" 
 
The pro-independence "Taiwan Daily" [circulation: 
150,000] commented in an editorial (5/12): 
 
"Furthermore, Taiwan independence is, of course, a 
representation of Taiwan's sovereignty consciousness. 
It concretely reflects the actual sovereign 
jurisdiction and the universal values of civic 
awareness and self-determination.  Therefore, both the 
ruling and opposition parties in Taiwan and the people 
and government across the Strait should fully respect 
the will of the 23 million people who live in Taiwan. 
James Soong's statement of cross-Strait unification 
came from historic sentiments and even ruled out the 
option of Taiwan independence by the Taiwan people. We 
strongly oppose to this and [believe] it quite 
disrespectful to the right of choice entitled to the 
people of Taiwan. 
 
". We also agree that the Taiwan economic miracle and 
Taiwan experience being recognized by James Soong can 
become topics for cross-Strait exchanges and mutual 
learning in the foreseeable future. Certainly, despite 
the Lien-Hu meeting or the Soong-Hu meeting, there can 
only be more rational discussions and dialogue 
regarding cross-Strait political negotiations and 
bilateral relations when the gap of democratic maturity 
and economic conditions between the two sides is 
getting closer." 
 
C) "Both [Tsinghua] Universities [in Beijing and 
Taipei] Share the Same Motto; Why Can't Both Sides of 
the Taiwan Strait Share the Same Vision?" 
 
The pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 
600,000] editorialized (5/12): 
 
". Maybe the two sides across the Strait do not need to 
hurry in determining each other's political designation 
by `free interpretations of one China.'  The reason is 
that whether it is called the `old Three Principles of 
the People' or the `new Three Principles of the People' 
at the level of ideas and ideals, as long as what is 
being longed for is the same direction and goal, why 
not start from the `one common vision and free 
interpretations. .'" 
 
D) "Soong [Seeks to] Build a Platform [Based on] the 
1992 Consensus; But Bian and Hu Hardly Share the Same 
View" 
 
Journalists Yang Yu-wen and Lin Hsin-hui noted in a 
news analysis of the centrist, pro-status quo "China 
Times" [circulation: 600,000] (5/12): 
 
". The political coalition of President Chen and [PFP 
Chairman] James Soong has created a platform for 
dialogue between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and 
the DPP amid the one China disputes.  But this platform 
is being shaken now due to the Pan-Green camp's recent 
backlashes and power struggle.  Chen's remarks 
delivered prior to Soong's departure, which called 
Soong a `messenger' and said there was a 10-point 
consensus between him and Soong but no consensus 
regarding the 1992 Consensus, have impaired Soong's 
credibility and the justification of his role to speak 
[on behalf of Chen].  Even if [Chinese President] Hu 
Jintao accepts Chen's view on the 1992 Consensus as 
conveyed by Soong, Chen has clearly denied in public 
any possibility to accept the 1992 Consensus.  Thus the 
meeting between Soong and Hu is doomed to fail. 
 
"The backlashes from the Pan-Green camp have made Chen 
feel highly uncertain [of the camp's support for him], 
and occasionally conflicts occur [inside the DPP] about 
who will be Chen's successor and which route [the DPP] 
should adopt.  [Given such a situation,] even Beijing 
can understand it if Chen decides suddenly to return to 
his original route.  Beijing did not expect to see a 
new foundation built immediately for both sides of the 
Taiwan Strait to resume talks.  All [people] can do now 
is to wait until after [this Saturday's] National 
Assembly elections to see if Chen will clearly indicate 
his position in his speech slated for May 20, his 
inauguration anniversary. . 
 
"Even if Soong fails to accomplish his task during this 
China trip, he has after all opened a window.  On the 
cooperation platform built by the Pan-Blue camp and the 
CCP, various exchange and opening plans across the 
Taiwan Strait and relevant auxiliary measures can be 
scheduled immediately.  Anti-Taiwan independence, 
insistence on the 1992 Consensus and pursuit for peace 
are the views commonly shared by the KMT, PFP and CCP, 
which, as time moves on, can be used as a strategy to 
change the public view and affect the position of the 
Pan-Green camp." 
 
E) "Lack of Leadership Killing Taiwan" 
 
The pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times" 
[circulation: 30,000] commented in its editorial 
(5/12): 
 
"Taiwan is facing a political situation that is not 
without its ironies.  The Chinese Nationalist Party 
(KMT) has joined hands with the Chinese Communist Party 
(CCP) to isolate President Chen Shui-bian while, on the 
domestic front there is bloody inter-party strife. 
China doesn't need to do much more to create all-out 
political chaos in Taiwan.  Meanwhile, resentment 
against KMT Chairman Lien Chan selling out Taiwan is 
building and could burst forth at any time.  Is the US, 
which has sought to promote cross-strait peace at any 
cost, satisfied to see Taiwan bleeding and China 
gloating? . 
 
"The situation could get even more thrilling.  People 
First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong will meet with 
Chinese President Hu Jintao in Beijing today.  Who 
knows what tricks Hu has up his sleeve, or how Soong 
might respond?  If Soong follows Lien's example of 
rolling over for Hu, domestic divisions might deepen. 
The Uriah Heep-like subservience of opposition leaders 
to China can only spark resentment from those who 
uphold `Taiwan consciousness.'  Already there are many 
on pro-independence Internet forums advocating an 
acceptance of war, if that's what it takes, to realize 
Taiwan's future. . 
 
"And what will happen when Chen's position becomes 
untenable?  If the opposition gains an even greater 
advantage in Saturday's [National Assembly] elections 
this can only delight China.  The real casualty of 
Chen's political demise will be the nation's 
democracy." 
 
PAAL