US embassy cable - 05TAIPEI2165

C O N F I D E N T I A L TAIPEI 002165 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/13/2030 
TAGS: CH, PREL, TW, ESTH 
SUBJECT: TAIWAN MOFA CRITICISES PRC POSITION AT WHA 
 
Classified By: AIT Director Douglas Paal. Reasons 1.5 (b,d) 
 
1. (C) Victor Chin, Director General of North American 
Affairs Division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 
forwarded to AIT late on May 12 a press release in Chinese 
that, he said, had been issued earlier in the day. 
 
2. (C) The press release responds to the PRC diplomatic note 
that has been circulated and apparently made public in 
Geneva. Much of the press release recites familiar and often 
valid complaints by the Taiwan side concerning PRC refusal to 
allow Taiwan observer status at the WHA, the treatment of the 
delegation at the recent WHO meeting in Bangkok on public 
health issues in the wake of the December 26 Tsunami, and the 
WHO refusal to accredit Taiwan reporters. 
 
3. (C) The last portion of the press release addresses the 
specifics of the package that has been worked out to enable 
Taiwan to participate in the International Health 
Regulations. It states that Taiwan cannot accept the use of 
the term "Taiwan, China" in the MOU that the PRC plans to 
sign with the WHO Secretariat. It also insists that it is 
unreasonable for the WHO to notify the PRC representative 
office in Geneva before engaging in cooperation with Taiwan 
under the IHR. The press release concludes by stating that 
Taiwan has already communicated officially to the WHO that it 
would be impossible for Taiwan to accept any arrangement that 
diminishes Taiwan's status. 
 
4. (C) AIT Deputy Director (DDIR) discussed this release with 
Chin by phone later Thursday evening. DDIR pointed out that 
both the MOU and the agreement to notify the PRC, without 
seeking consent, were integral parts of the four-part package 
that had been worked out after considerable effort by U.S. 
negotiators and in full consultation with Taiwan 
counterparts. He also noted that the MOU language would not 
be a public document, and that it would be hardly surprising 
if a UN organization and a UN member used UN terminology to 
refer to Taiwan, however much Taiwan might disagree with that 
terminology. Chin said that he believed that everyone in MOFA 
understood the points DDIR had made, but they felt a 
requirement to demonstrate to their domestic political 
audience that they were fighting for Taiwan's dignity. Chin 
did concede however that Minister Mark Chen has been very 
categorical in recent MOFA meetings in insisting that the IHR 
agreement must incorporate language fully respectful of 
Taiwan. DDIR urged Chin to convey to the Minister our 
concerns and said that AIT would be prepared to meet with 
MOFA and with the Minister to discuss this further if it 
would be useful. 
 
5. (C) Chin promised to convey our point of view and to 
extend our offer to the Minister. He said that he had some 
hope that the Minister might be trying to express a hard line 
for domestic political consumption, knowing that it would be 
necessary to be more flexible in moving forward on the IHR 
agreement. 
 
6. (C) Comment. While Victor Chin has been a valuable and 
reliable interlocutor and we share his hopes, we would also 
note that Minister Chen has frequently shown a willingness in 
recent months to appeal to Taiwan domestic political 
audiences and Taiwan pride even when that strains external 
relations and international initiatives to the breaking point. 
PAAL