US embassy cable - 05TAIPEI2187

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TAIPEI 002187 
 
SIPDIS 
 
CORRECTED COPY -- REF ADDED, PRECEDENCE CHANGED 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/14/2030 
TAGS: CH, EU, PREL, TW, ESTH 
SUBJECT: TAIWAN DOES NOT PLAN TO RELEASE WHO-PRC MOU 
 
REF: PAAL-MESERVE 5/14/2005 TELCON 
 
Classified By: AIT Director Douglas Paal. Reasons 1.5 (b,d) 
 
1. (C) Summary. AIT conveyed to Taiwan NSC and MOFA (per ref 
telcon) concern that Taiwan might make public the WHO-PRC MOU 
on Taiwan's participation in the International Health 
Regulations. Vice Foreign Minister Kau called AIT from Geneva 
to assure AIT that they did not have a copy of the MOU and 
did not plan to make it public. He said that Taiwan is 
frustrated by its inability to obtain a copy of the proposed 
WHO letter to Taiwan on the IHR, and it was using the threat 
of an observer vote to pressure the WHO on the letter. AIT 
cautioned Kau against seeking a vote that was not in Taiwan's 
interests and urged that Taiwan's delegation coordinate 
closely with the U.S. delegation. END SUMMARY. 
 
2. (C) AIT Deputy Director (DDIR) spoke to Secretary General 
Chiou I-ren of Taiwan's National Security Council and Victor 
Chin, Director General of the North American Division at 
Taiwan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs on May 14 to express our 
concern over reports that Taiwan had obtained a copy of the 
confidential MOU between the PRC and the World Health 
 
SIPDIS 
Organization (WHO) Secretariat and that Taiwan might make the 
text public if it contained terminology objectionable to 
Taiwan. The MOU is the part of the agreement reached to 
enable Taiwan to participate in the International Health 
Regulations. AIT DDIR made it clear that the U.S. would be 
seriously concerned about such publication of the MOU, which 
could very well scuttle the IHR agreement, negotiated at 
considerable effort over the course of many months. He urged 
the Taiwan side not to let its objections to the term 
"Taiwan, China" in a confidential document ruin this 
opportunity to improve significantly the level of Taiwan's 
interaction with the WHO. 
 
3. (C) Both Chiou and Chin said that they understood U.S. 
concerns, that Taiwan deeply appreciated the effort the U.S. 
side had expended in the course of these negotiations. Both 
promised that they would seek clarification from the Taiwan 
delegation in Geneva. Chin noted, however, that the Ministry 
is very sensitive to accusations that it has not been 
sufficiently tough in defending Taiwan's dignity over the 
several years of efforts to gain observer status and greater 
participation in the WHO. For that reason, it would be very 
difficult to defend any acceptance of WHO use of "Taiwan, 
China" to refer to Taiwan. DDIR urged that Taiwan not allow 
its sensitivity over nomenclature to prevent this step 
forward in its WHO access and this improvement in its 
international stature. He noted that the MOU is not intended 
to be a public document and Taiwan's interests are best 
served by not making it public. 
 
4. (C) Vice Foreign Minister Michael Kau called DDIR later 
May 14. He said he had received the cable resulting from 
DDIR's earlier calls.  He clarified that Taiwan's Geneva 
delegation had not/not obtained a copy of the WHO-PRC MOU and 
that it intended to respect the confidentiality of the MOU 
and its language. He stressed however that "we hate" the use 
of "Taiwan, China." Despite these objections, he did not plan 
to obtain and make public the WHO-PRC MOU. 
 
5. (C) Kau said that his delegation is working hard to secure 
the agreement of the WHO Secretariat to provide a draft 
letter for Taiwan, the fourth element in the IHR 
participation package. If they obtained a draft then Taiwan 
would be prepared to accept the "2 plus 2" format for a 
limited debate of Taiwan's observer status at the WHA. Taiwan 
is using the threat of a broader debate and a possible vote, 
he said, in order to put pressure on the Secretariat to move 
on the letter.  DDIR cautioned Kau that a vote on observer 
status would not advance Taiwan's interests unless it could 
demonstrate a significant increase in votes favoring Taiwan. 
Kau agreed that winning additional votes was unlikely, but he 
added that some Taiwan delegates and interest groups continue 
to urge a public gesture to show Taiwan's unhappiness. 
 
6. (C) The Taiwan delegation, Kau said, has also urged the 
WHO Secretariat to agree to a focal point in Taiwan, most 
likely the Department of Health, for cooperation under the 
IHR and to make the Taiwan Health Entity a party to the IHR. 
This might be part of the letter agreed to as part of the IHR 
package agreement, or it might be a separate agreement. 
 
7. (C) Kau also expressed frustration that the Secretariat 
and the WHO Director General have not responded in writing 
either to the letter from Secretary of Health and Human 
Services Levitt or to the May 13 meeting held by EU 
representatives with the WHO Director General, which the 
Belgian ambassador had organized to urge concrete action to 
facilitate Taiwan's IHR participation. 
 
8. (C) Kau concluded by observing that he and his delegation 
are under considerable domestic political pressure to produce 
concrete results. Before their departure, the Foreign 
Minister had said in front of foreign visitors that the 
delegation should only return if it had something in hand. 
 
9. (C) DDIR promised to convey Kau's concerns and urged that 
he and Taiwan's Geneva Representative Shen, Lyu-hsun should 
stay in close touch with the U.S. delegation and discuss 
these concerns with them. 
PAAL