TAIPEI, 21 January 2004 — Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian’s re-election tactic of talking tough to archrival China while reassuring chief ally the United States that his aim is not independence is only confusing voters.

Chen must make clear his intentions or face the prospect of failing to win over the electorate, analysts say. So far, his record is mixed.

First, he announced plans to hold a referendum, aiming to win over the pro-independence lobby by standing up to giant neighbor China that sees the vote as a move by a breakaway province toward announcing statehood.

Then, reacting to US worries he was upsetting the delicate status quo with China, Chen last week watered down the questions to be asked in the referendum, with a result that voters on all sides began to question the motives of their president.

“The thunder was loud but the raindrops turned out to be small,” said Chen Yuchun, a political scientist at the private Chinese Culture University in Taipei.

“All this talk of the referendum as an oath of sovereignty, of standing up to communist China, has amounted to nothing.”

Compounding Chen’s problems, the issue simmers as an irritant in Taipei’s relations with Beijing and thus is a source of concern to Washington, which recently took the unprecedented move of warning Taiwan not to alter the status quo with China.

The referendum — which many voters see as irrelevant in the face of pressing economic and social problems — would ask whether Taiwan ought to buy advanced anti-missile weapons should China refuse to withdraw the missiles aimed at the island.

It would also ask whether the two sides should open talks on creating peaceful and stable ties. The original question went more to the heart of the matter, asking whether China should remove those hundreds of missiles.

Critics say the new questions deflate Chen’s re-election campaign, which had been centered on an aggressive claim that Taiwan is a country separate from China. The two sides have been diplomatic and ideological foes since their split at the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949.

Chen’s aim had been to consolidate votes from core supporters while diverting attention from the administrative setbacks, policy reversals and economic problems that have plagued his nearly four-year-old administration, analysts say.

The watered-down referendum questions are neither one thing nor the other, critics say.

“We do not oppose stability, peace, and dialogue on both sides of the Strait. But is this referendum really necessary?” Nationalist Party chairman Lien Chan, Chen’s opponent in the March 20 polls, asked on Monday.

“It’s legally unfounded. It’s unnecessary. It’s a waste.”

Moderate voters may back Chen’s toned-down stance prompted by pressure from the United States, which is the island’s main arms supplier and biggest trade partner. However, that stand may not gain enough votes to win re-election.

“It won’t inspire passions,” said Andy Chang, a China watcher at Tamkang University. “But it won’t lead to a backlash either.”

Many in Taiwan see the referendum as an election ploy, a waste of taxpayers’ money and an irrelevance while the government faces serious economic and social issues. “I agree with Chen that we should hold a referendum. But I question his timing. Is it really in the country’s best interest to hold it now?” said a bank manager surnamed Cheng.

“He’s simply trying to distract voter attention from some of his policy failings in the last four years, like his rough handling of international affairs and the poor economy.”

Some analysts say the referendum questions are less important than the fact Taiwan will hold one. Many assess the innovation as a step on a path toward independence. Indeed, China on Monday - yet again - warned Taiwan the referendum would push ties to the “brink of danger”.

Taiwan voters who advocate a permanent split with China could be persuaded that the referendum will open that door. “Once you open this referendum mechanism it will continue,” said Andrew Yang, professor of international politics at National Sun Yat-sen University.

“And Washington and Beijing are very concerned about what will be the next step.”