I write to protest the manner in which I was quoted in the editorial published in your paper on March 21 ("WTO caves in to China's demands," page 8). I was very seriously misquoted. To begin, I never said the "official title for each WTO member's representative is uniformly `permanent representative.'" Secondly, I did not say "whether a member's representative is addressed as "`ambassador' is completely at the discretion of each member."
What I said was that the WTO Secretariat cannot and does not change nomenclature submitted to us by members. Moreover, I said clearly that the rights and obligations of Chinese Taipei will not be in any way undermined regardless of how the telephone directory is resolved.
Director, Information and Media Relations Division
Editor's note: The contents of the editorial in question were based on news stories written in the Chinese language that were published by the local news agencies in Taiwan, which explains why they were not verbatim quotes, but were instead restatements of points made. It is truly regretful if Mr. Rockwell felt that these statements were either in contradiction with a point he made or with any WTO rules and/or practices.