US embassy cable - 05TAIPEI3763

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TAIPEI 003763 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/RSP/TC, EAP/PA, EAP/PD - 
ERIC BARBORIAK 
DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC, KMDR, KPAO, TW 
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S. ARMS SALES TO TAIWAN, 
AVIAN FLU 
 
 
1. Summary: The coverage of major Chinese-language 
Taipei dailies September 9 focused on the delayed 
inauguration of Taiwan's first high-speed railway, 
local politics, and cross-Strait issues.  Both pro- 
independence newspapers "Taiwan Daily" and "Liberty 
Times" carried reports on their front and second pages 
(respectively) about the "Taiwan Republic National Flag- 
Raising Ceremony" in front of the Presidential Office 
Thursday in which more than 1,000 pro-independence 
activists participated.  All Chinese-language 
newspapers reported on the change of KMT legislators' 
attitude toward the U.S. arms procurement bill; namely, 
KMT legislators have decided to send back the budget 
earmarked for the PAC-3 missiles to the Executive Yuan 
because they claim that a referendum in 2004 on missile 
purchases was vetoed by Taiwan voters. 
 
2. Several newspapers editorialized on the disputed 
U.S. arms procurement bill.  A column in the pro- 
independence "Liberty Times" criticized the pan-Blue 
camp's argument that tries to link the defensive 
referendum in 2004 with the U.S. procurement bill.  An 
editorial and a commentary of the centrist "China 
Times," however, both said the fact that the defensive 
referendum was vetoed will naturally reduce the 
legitimacy of the government's plan to buy anti-missile 
devices.  An op-ed piece in the limited-circulation, 
pro-independence, English-language "Taipei Times," 
turned to the topic of avian flu research.  According 
to the opinion piece, more evidence is needed to prove 
the effectiveness of pharmaceuticals being marketed as 
protection from avian flu.  End summary. 
 
1. U.S. Arms Sales to Taiwan 
 
A) "Weird Views against the Arms Procurements" 
 
The "Free Talk" column of the pro-independence "Liberty 
Times" [circulation: 600,000] wrote (9/8): 
 
". The pan-Blue camp said last year's defensive 
referendum results vetoed the purchase of PAC-3 
missiles, so [members of the camp have] decided to send 
the budget earmarked for the PAC-3 missiles back [to 
the Executive Yuan].  These remarks are a 
misinterpretation of the results of the defensive 
referendum.  The defensive referendum failed to pass 
because the comprehensive boycott and misguidance of 
the pan-Blue camp caused the voter turnout [to be so 
low that it] failed to meet the legal threshold of at 
least 50 percent of the total eligible voters.  It did 
not indicate that most voters were opposed to the arms 
procurements. 
 
"In fact, among the 7.09 million voters that 
participated in the referendum, 6.51 million, or 92 
percent, voted to support the arms procurement.  How 
can such an overwhelming result be interpreted as that 
the Taiwan public is opposed to arms procurements?" 
 
B) "The Referendum Failed to Tie [Up] the Presidential 
Election but Has Shackled Arms Procurements" 
 
The centrist, pro-status quo "China Times" 
[circulation: 400,000] editorialized (9/9): 
 
"Perhaps it really failed to occur to President Chen 
and his DPP party that the referendum they pushed so 
strongly last year for missile purchases would turn 
into major leverage used by the pan-Blue camp now to 
oppose the [U.S.] arms procurement bill.  The meeting 
between KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou and PFP Chairman 
James Soong just ended two days ago.  Despite the fact 
that both of them still have different views about 
whether the special arms procurement bill should be 
reviewed by [the Legislative Yuan's] Procedure 
Committee, they nonetheless shared a consensus that the 
ruling DPP party should first clarify the referendum 
results of last year, in which the arms procurement 
proposal was vetoed by the Taiwan people.  Even 
Legislative Yuan President Wang Jin-pyng believes that 
President Chen should clarify this controversy.  It is 
ironic now that the pan-Green camp is reluctant to talk 
about the referendum while the pan-Blue camp takes it 
very seriously. . 
 
"We do not know what the Green camp will do to resolve 
the dispute concerning the arms procurement bill other 
than continuing to argue over the wording [of last 
year's referendum].  If it tries to use sophistry to 
continue undermining the sacredness and validity of 
last year's referendum, the move will surely affect the 
sacredness of legitimacy of other defensive referendums 
in the future.  We just want to say: Please keep in 
mind the implementation process of Taiwan's first-ever 
referendum and the various absurdities that it 
triggered later in our time and in history.  . Please 
do not use [a referendum] as a tool for political 
manipulation again!  The value of the popular vote in 
Taiwan's constitutional operations will be likely 
destroyed if anyone in his right mind still wants to 
use a referendum as a tool to achieve other goals." 
 
C) "It Is More Important to Solve the Problem" 
 
Journalist Hsiao Hsu-tsen noted in the "My Views" 
column of the centrist, pro-status quo "China Times" 
[circulation: 400,000] (9/9): 
 
". Even though [last year's] referendum failed to pass, 
it does not mean that the Taiwan people are opposed to 
strengthening the island's national defense and being 
engaged in equal talks with Beijing.  As [we] recall 
the tensions between the pan-Blue and pan-Green camps 
last year when President Chen insisted on launching a 
defensive referendum that would trigger a controversy 
over whether Chen violated the law, [we may realize 
that] the vetoed referendum that proposed to purchase 
anti-missile devices is actually a sacrificial lamb . 
in the battles between Blue and Green.  We cannot thus 
infer that the Taiwan public is opposed to purchase 
more devices that will counterattack Beijing's missiles 
aimed at the island. 
 
"Nonetheless, the law is the law.  The fact that the 
defensive referendum was vetoed will naturally reduce 
the legitimacy of the government's plan to buy anti- 
missile devices.  The Executive Yuan's decision to 
include the budget earmarked for the PAC-3 missiles in 
the government's annual budget is a move that has 
expand the contentions [over arms procurements] to a 
constitutional controversy.  This is why KMT Chairman 
Ma Ying-jeou insists that the government must deal with 
the [purchase of the] PAC-3 missiles and why some KMT 
legislators propose that they should return the budget 
to the Executive Yuan. ." 
 
2. Avian Flu 
 
"Flu Research Needs Means Testing" 
 
Hsieh Yen-yao, Vice President of the Koo Foundation's 
Sun Yat-sen Cancer Foundation, noted in the pro- 
independence, English-language "Taipei Times" 
[circulation: 30,000] (9/9): 
 
"In contrast to the heated debate on the arms- 
procurement package, the government, which regards the 
bird flu epidemic as a threat to national security, has 
not hesitated to allocate NT$30 billion to purchase 
vaccines and other preventive measures.  This budget 
was approved without causing any controversy.  No one 
seems to have questioned this action.  This is because 
certain interest groups have used the statements made 
by the World Health Organization (WHO) and foreign 
experts to convince the public. . 
 
". [W]e want to question that accuracy of the 
predictions that more than 5 million people would be 
infected and at least 10 thousand people would die if a 
potential bird flu epidemic strikes Taiwan next March. 
The US Food and Drug Administration approved the use of 
Tamiflu (oseltamivir phosphate) to treat patients 
diagnosed with flu but without any other complications. 
In other words, Tamiflu has not been shown to prevent 
life-threatening conditions such as pneumonia.  This is 
to say that Tamiflu cannot save the lives of people 
facing complications from pneumonia resulting from 
avian flu. 
 
"The WHO hasn't released any documents saying that 
Tamiflu is an effective treatment for avian flu, nor 
has it urged countries to purchase a sufficient amount 
of Tamiflu and store it for later use. . 
 
"Zanamivir, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, is a 
medication similar to Roche's Tamiflu, but it was not 
widely promoted so it was neglected in favor of 
Tamiflu, which the government bought in great volume 
despite evidence it was ineffective against avian flu. 
This was done in violation of the Government 
Procurement Act and the Pharmaceutical Act, and goes 
against medical principles. 
 
"Take note that Taiwan's resources are limited, and the 
budget for avian flu should not be used to raise the 
diagnostic standard of Taiwan's doctors and to improve 
the treatment for pneumonia, rather than spending on 
developing new vaccines that have no guarantee of 
success.  And instead of purchasing Tamiflu, the money 
would be better spent on developing new kinds of 
respirators. 
 
"Marcus Reidenberg, a professor of pharmacology at 
Cornell University, has written that in the past, when 
science and clinical pharmacology were not well 
developed, doctors would often use, with the best 
possible intentions, treatments that were harmful to 
patients or for which the dangers greatly exceeded 
efficacy.  This was because the means were not 
available to test the safety and effectiveness of the 
treatment, and they can be forgiven because they acted 
with the highest motives. 
 
"Means for the testing of pharmaceuticals is now 
available, and if such mistakes are made again, doctors 
should no longer benefit from the public's forgiveness, 
however high their motives may be." 
 
KEEGAN