U.S. and Taiwan (2006)

U.S. Department of State

Daily Press Briefing

Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman
Washington, DC
February 27, 2006

1:17 p.m. EST

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

QUESTION: My question is Taiwan leader Chen Shui-bian announced in Taipei a decision to stop the operation of the National Unification Council and the application of National Unification guidelines. What's your response to his decision?

MR. ERELI: Well, it won't surprise you to learn that our policy on Cross-Strait relations has not changed. Our one China policy is based on the three communiqués and the Taiwan Relations Act. We are, of course, opposed to any unilateral change to the status quo by either side and we do not support Taiwan independence.

I would note today that President Chen reaffirmed his continuing commitment to the pledges he made in his 2000 inaugural address not to change the status of the status quo across the Straits and we continue to stress the need for Beijing to open a dialogue with the elected leadership in Taiwan.

On the question of the National Unification Council, it's our understanding that President Chen did not abolish it and he reaffirmed Taiwan's commitment to the status quo. We attach great importance to that commitment and we'll be following his follow-through carefully.

Yes.

QUESTION: Do you think (inaudible) either change to the status quo? Is it -- and what's the U.S. definition of the changes to the status quo?

MR. ERELI: I think President Chen has said that he is committed to the status quo and that he is committed to his -- the pledges in his inaugural speech. We believe that the -- we attach great importance to those commitments and we will be following events closely.

QUESTION: Okay. What steps U.S. is following closely and what steps will the U.S. take to curb -- to (inaudible)?

MR. ERELI: Well, we continue to stress the importance, as I did in my comments earlier, of dialogue between Beijing and Taiwan on Cross-Strait issues. It is important, we believe, that resolution of this issue avoid unilateral steps and focus on dialogue and that's the tact that we encourage both sides to take.

QUESTION: I just want to get this right. So, you don't consider this as a change of status quo?

MR. ERELI: You know, I'm not going to define it further than I already have. It has not been abolished; it's been frozen. He himself has said that he is committed to the status quo and that he is committed to his inaugural pledges and that is an important statement of policy.

QUESTION: And you are committed to the status quo, too, aren't you?

MR. ERELI: And we are committed to a one China policy.

QUESTION: Well, but that's pretty status --

QUESTION: Based on the three --

MR. ERELI: Based on the three communiqués –and -- class?

QUESTION: (Cross-talk)

MR. ERELI: The Taiwan Relations Act.

QUESTION: What do you think they're going to be talking about?

MR. ERELI: Resolving their differences.

QUESTION: But you believe there's only one China. Is there any other major difference?

MR. ERELI: Come on, Barry. Let's --

QUESTION: Okay, but I mean -- it's gotten to be sort of boilerplate.

MR. ERELI: Yes. Exactly. That's why --

QUESTION: And this is a big event, so I thought maybe there's something a little more that the State Department could --

MR. ERELI: I think --

QUESTION: When it comes to China, State Department gets very quiet.

MR. ERELI: Sir.

QUESTION: Yes. President Chen, of course, in his announcement, used the expression that the Unification Council ceases to function and also the guideline ceases to apply. You're saying, by using the phrase, you know, "cease to function," he's not actually abolishing the Council.

MR. ERELI: Our understanding --

QUESTION: I'm not sure I would agree with you because, you know, linguistically and semantically, "cease" is the same thing as abolishing.

MR. ERELI: Sir, all I can say is that President Chen has said he is committed to the status quo, he is not changing the status quo and he is committed to his inaugural pledges. The NUC -- he also -- the NUC exists and so we're going to hold him to those pledges.

QUESTION: Well, he has said this countless times in the past and do you still have confidence in him when he says something that he had said before, though?

MR. ERELI: I think our views -- I've stated them as clearly as I can.

QUESTION: Adam, did the United States encourage him not to take the step?

MR. ERELI: I think the United States has made it clear to the Taiwanese leadership on any number of occasions that we are opposed to unilateral moves and we urge strongly that he remain consistent with his commitments in the inaugural pledge of 2000 and that he not take any unilateral moves. I would note that he has said that this action is not a unilateral move.

QUESTION: Would you agree a cessation is a unilateral move?

MR. ERELI: Pardon?

QUESTION: Is his action, from the U.S. view, a unilateral move?

MR. ERELI: I think that I would just leave it at what President Chen said and hold him at that, which is it is not a unilateral move.

QUESTION: And in spite of all the communication between the U.S. and Taiwan, Chen stick to his decision. So is there any actions the U.S. side is going to take?

MR. ERELI: I think we will continue to -- as I said earlier, we will continue to hold President Chen by his commitments not to take unilateral moves and to remain committed to his inaugural pledges of 2000.

QUESTION: Can I ask you something else?

QUESTION: Do you consider this episode closed for now?

MR. ERELI: For us, the episode is closed or the issue is closed when Taiwan -- when parties on both sides of the Straits resolve their differences. And that's what we continue to urge both sides to do: engage in a dialogue so that issues and discussions like we're having today are a thing of the past.

Yes.

QUESTION: Adam, at first the United States actually has tried to persuade President Chen to give up his plan to abolish the Council and the guidelines. What made you soften your stand, you know, moving from urging him not to do it to actually working out the specific wording? In Chinese, it is actually "terminate." It's not even "cease to apply." You know "zhongzhi" is terminate. I don't understand the difference between termination and abolishment.

MR. ERELI: Not being a Chinese speaker, I don't know either. What I can tell you is our understanding is that the NUC has not been abolished; it has been frozen, number one. Number two, that President Chen has stated that this does not alter the status quo and; number two, he has said he is committed to not take unilateral actions which would alter the status quo, all of which are positions that we have very strongly advocated and which have been reaffirmed.

QUESTION: Adam, we didn't hear him actually reaffirm his pledges or assurance to adhere to his inaugural address commitment. Did you hear it somewhere else? Because we didn't really hear it.

One other question, Adam. Do you really think the U.S. policy is working? I mean, you know, when you say to abolish or to terminate the Council and the guidelines may seem, you know, to be steps to change -- unilaterally change the status quo, and then a week later, you know, you're saying, hey, President Chen actually is not changing the status quo. I don't understand that. You know, is your policy working?

And also, you are calling for China to talk to President Chen. What was the incentive that you think China would get out of this? If China did not agree to talk to him yesterday, what is the incentive that will make China talk to him today?

MR. ERELI: I can't speak for China. What I can speak for is the United States and the fact that we've got, I think, a very clear and consistent policy that is focused on preventing either side from taking unilateral actions that affect the status quo. In this case, in this latest case, there were pledges made in 2000 that we thought were important to respect. President Chen has reaffirmed today, our understanding, the fact that the steps that he has taken do not constitute a change in the status quo and he reaffirmed his commitment to those 2000 pledges.

That is important, because what -- you can't -- as you suggested in your question, you can't promote dialogue if there isn't the confidence between both sides that the other one isn't taking unilateral steps. So, it's very important, the public statements that we've heard from Chen today, and it's very important that based on those public statements and based on what the leadership of Taiwan has said is a commitment not to change the status quo, that you move beyond the news of the day and talk about the real issues that are causing problems.

QUESTION: One more?

MR. ERELI: One more.

QUESTION: We understand the U.S. policy remains the same and remains firm, very firm, but are there any policy implications because of this – for U.S. policy? You know, obviously, when the decision-makers in this building come to the building today, it's a different day. It's different from yesterday.

MR. ERELI: Yes, I will agree with that. (Laughter.) And that I think the focus of our policy, even though one day is different than the next, is continuity and that's why I began this long discussion by reminding you that our policy remains consistent based on --

QUESTION: "One China." (Laughter).

MR. ERELI: Based on the three communiqués and the Taiwan Relations Act.

QUESTION: Has it changed?

MR. ERELI: Okay, I guess --

QUESTION: Can I make one more try?

MR. ERELI: One more try.

QUESTION: One more try, okay. I would like to know if there's some kind of understanding that the U.S. side has been given permission to construe President Chen's decision to let the council to cease to function as not abolishing -- your word. Is there some kind of -- and Taiwan will not challenge whatever you say at this podium about, particularly, your language, not abolishing -- actually, you know, my colleague back there just pointed out the word -- the expression -- in Chinese "zhongzhi" simply means terminating, which is like abolishing. So, that's why I want to know, is there some kind of an understanding, agreement between the two sides that the U.S. can interpret this in the way as abolishing -- not abolishing?

MR. ERELI: I would -- sir, I just --

QUESTION: Whereas Taiwan is saying, you know, it's abolishing --

MR. ERELI: Let me just -- I'd refer you to President Chen's public comments and his reaffirmation that this is not a unilateral step to change the status quo and that's a statement of Taiwanese policy and that's an important reaffirmation of Taiwanese policy and we certainly look forward to them fulfilling those commitments.

QUESTION: Will he pay a price for this?

MR. ERELI: I don't -- you know, I don't know what that means.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) pay a price for this?

MR. ERELI: The United States is working to promote resolution of Cross-Strait differences and that's the objective that we're going to continue to focus on.

QUESTION: Could I turn to something else?

QUESTION: What is the PRC's reaction so far? We know Mr. Yang Jiechi's visit here, he raised Taiwan questions. So far, did you get other --

MR. ERELI: I've got nothing new to report for you on that.

Mr. Schweid.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

QUESTION: Yeah, I'm just wondering if you have seen the report in (inaudible) and a number of other media that at least eight prominent human rights activist in China were arrested recently because they joined the hunger strike relay -- nationwide hunger strike relay in protest of all the human rights situation in China recently.

MR. ERELI: I have not seen those reports. Isn't that a number of individuals, did you say, or --

QUESTION: The hunger strike was started by a famous human rights lawyer, Gao Zhisheng. And Amnesty International activists sent out and urgent action notice back in January and there are eight prominent human rights activists that were arrested.

MR. ERELI: Yes. Well, I don't have anything specific on that report. I'll see if I can get something for you. As you know, we strongly support the rights of freedom of speech and freedom of information and the rule of law and the rights of the accused in China. The case of Mr. Gao is a case that we have raised with the Chinese. We will continue to be very active in ensuring that -- and in working with the Chinese to ensure that the rights of its citizens are respected and that due process is followed.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:19 p.m.)