US embassy cable - 05TAIPEI2207

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 TAIPEI 002207 
 
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, Domestic Politics 
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS AND 
CROSS-STRAIT RELATIONS 
 
1. Summary: Major Taiwan newspapers May 17 carried on their 
front pages the report on Taiwan's failure to gain 
participation in the World Health Assembly as an observer. 
Taiwan`s biggest newspaper, pro-independence "Liberty Times" 
ran a banner headline in the first page that read: "21 
Countries Voiced Their Supports for Taiwan's Bid to 
Participate in the WHA."  Both pro-status quo "China Times" 
and pro-unification "United Daily News" carried similar 
banners on their front pages that read: "Participation in 
the WHA, the Ninth Failure." 
 
2. With regard to editorials, pro-independence "Liberty 
Times" commented on Saturday's National Assembly elections 
and said the lowest-ever election turnout in Taiwan 
indicates that the public is not satisfied with the 
dishonesty of both the ruling and opposition parties.  Pro- 
unification "United Daily News" proposed different 
interpretations of "two sides of the Strait, one China," 
which was a consenus reached between PFP Chairman James 
Soong and China's President Hu Jintao.  The editorial of the 
"United Daily News" also commented on "one China defined by 
the Constitution" as the key to solving the current deadlock 
on cross-Strait relations. 
 
A) "Sincerely Facing Democracy, Sincerely Facing Taiwan, 
Sincerely Facing the People" 
 
An editorial of pro-independence "Liberty Times" 
[circulation: 800,000] said (5/17): 
 
". Frankly speaking, the reason for President Chen Shui- 
bian's criticizing Lien Chan, James Soong and even Lee Teng- 
hui and the Taiwan Solidarity Union before the election was 
entirely because of political pressure.  What political 
pressure?  That is, President Chen has violated his campaign 
promises and announced that he would no longer seek 
rectification of Taiwan's name and a new constitution. ." 
 
"Especially noteworthy is the 23 percent record low turnout 
of the National Assembly election.  This phenomenon is not 
accidental.  It is because many people chose to `abstain' to 
express their dissatisfaction with the ruling and opposition 
parties.  The so-called Bian-Soong meeting, Lien-Hu meeting 
and Soong-Hu meeting, or even the possible Bian-Hu meeting, 
are all very abnormal moves from the perspective of 
democratic practices.  This is not to totally deny the value 
of communications between ruling and opposition parties or 
between the two sides across the Strait, but to say that 
politicians are cheating the voters when they violate their 
campaign promises and deviate from their party platforms. 
Under the circumstances, voters certainly have the right to 
penalize them by taking active or passive measures. ." 
 
B) "Is `Two Sides of the Strait, One China' the same as `One 
China, Different Interpretations' or `Each Party Interprets 
One China'?" 
 
The pro-unification "United Daily News" [circulation: 
600,000] editorialized (5/17): 
 
[PAS Note: This editorial was a linguistic play-on-words in 
Chinese.  Our translation is meant to give the flavor of the 
opinion but there may be differences of opinion on the exact 
translation of individual clauses.] 
 
" .Different positions on `two sides of the Strait, one 
China' may lead to different interpretations, such as: `the 
status-quo across the Strait is one China,' `two sides of 
the Strait are ruled separately, one China in the future,' 
`two sides of the Strait share one China,' `two sides of the 
Strait separate one China,' `two sides of the Strait 
interpret the contents of one China separately,' `two sides 
of the Strait interprets the principle of one China.'  These 
interpretations are logical.  However, if the meaning of a 
political term is too diffuse or if one cannot interpret a 
political term firmly, the term is hardly practical.  This 
is the reason why society has different interpretations and 
evaluations of the statement `two sides of the Strait, One 
China. . 
 
". PFP Chairman James Soong said `two sides of the Strait, 
One China' is exactly `one China defined by the 
Constitution.'  This happens to be the key point.  The 
current deadlock is the result of the Chen administration's 
denial of `one China defined by the Constitution.'  If 
Taiwan does not even admit `one China defined by the 
Constitution,' how can China make concessions regarding `one 
China with different interpretations,' and how can China's 
concessions be useful? 
 
"President Chen Shui-bian denies any statement regarding 
`one China,' including `one China defined by the 
Constitution.'  And James Soong cannot cover this up for 
Chen.  Under the current situation, it is useless even if we 
interpret `two sides of the Strait, one China' as `one China 
with different interpretations.'  And it would be a setback 
if we interpret `two sides of the Strait, one China' as 
`each party interprets one China (policy).'" 
 
PAAL