Editorial: Enough about the pandas, already

Tomorrow the Council of Agriculture is expected to announce its formal rejection of two zoo operators' applications for the importation of pandas from China. Criticism from within Taiwan (primarily by the pan-blue camp) and from without (primarily Chinese officials) over the decision immediately followed the meeting of the council's Forestry Bureau on Friday. Critics decry the supposedly political nature of the decision. However, they seem to ignore that China's motives in offering the pandas were always political, and brazenly so. One can hardly blame a government for reciprocating with a political decision.

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was also quick to criticize the decision. This, of course, should surprise nobody, since Beijing's panda diplomacy was just about the only concrete result of former KMT chairman Lien Chan's (連戰) trip to China last year. It was the only substantial commitment that Beijing made to Lien -- the other pledges were as good as empty. If the pandas had entered Taiwan, the KMT would have had something to claim credit for, though many would have felt less charitable in their assessment.

Ma, as mayor of Taipei, is no doubt also unhappy because Taipei Zoo was one of the rejected applicants. Echoing the Chinese media, Ma and other critics of the government's decision complained that political interests should not intrude on gift-giving. But one should never look at such government decisions in isolation. Instead, they should be examined in the context of the entire cross-strait relationship. Only then can one recognize that the gesture was never anything more than an act of propaganda, and an admittedly effective one at that.

Through the simple act of giving two pandas, Beijing was trying to create the impression that China means no harm to Taiwan.

But there is barely a reason to believe in the existence of Chinese goodwill toward Taiwan against the backdrop of hundreds of Chinese missiles pointed this way, the repeated efforts by Beijing to keep Taiwan out of the World Health Organization, and the passage of the "Anti-Secession" Law, with possible revisions that will crack down on the very act of expressing support for this nation's democracy and self-determination.

Under the circumstances, what could the government do? It could have accepted the pandas (ignoring the prison lifestyles that they would have had to endure), but this would have rewarded China for its cynicism and diverted public attention from the growing danger that Taiwan faces.

If accepting the pandas had led Beijing to respect this place or had at least prompted the removal of missiles, then maybe it would have been justifiable. But this was never going to happen, and everybody knows it.

Those desperate for their "cute" fix can consider saving up to visit China's interior where pandas belong, or, better still, patronize the Taipei Zoo's native fauna exhibit, which includes an interesting range of creatures, including the magnificent -- and no less cute, if you don't get too close -- Formosan black bear.

The pandas are now a non-issue. Fully grown adults could do worse than move on and concern themselves with matters of substance.