A speech on Tuesday by Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi (
Obviously, Beijing decided to make the statement because the WHO had at last dispatched two experts to Taipei to help deal with the spread of SARS. The apparent point of Wu's remarks was to dampen our lifted spirits and quell rising hopes about Taiwan joining the world health body as a result of the arrival of these experts. This shows precisely the concern Beijing has about the health and well being of the people in Taiwan, or rather, its "Taiwanese comrades."
Exactly how much does Beijing care about the people here? Let the facts speak for themselves:
First, the biggest contribution China has made to the health of the people of Taiwan and the world lately is the transmission of the SARS virus. Thank you.
Second, Beijing's leadership deliberately concealed the outbreak of the epidemic, depriving people everywhere an opportunity to protect themselves from the sickness.
Third, even after the first case of SARS was reported in Taiwan on March 14, the government was unable to report it to the WHO -- let alone obtain any help -- because of China's sovereignty claim. In the end, the government finally managed to contact the WHO via the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US CDC). But precious time had already been lost.
Fourth, when the WHO finally decided to dispatch two experts to Taipei last weekend, Beijing decided that living under the threat of the SARS virus was not enough of a challenge for the Taiwanese. To add insult to injury, immediately after the New York Times reported on the dispatch of the WHO team (over Beijing's objections), the Xinhua News Agency reported that the Chinese government has decided to permit the WHO to send people to Taiwan.
The point of obtaining permission from a government would obviously be because it has any right to become involved in the first place. In the present case, it is truly puzzling how Beijing would be able to stop the WHO from sending people here, let alone why Taiwan would seek its approval. So why would Beijing's permission be needed?
But then again, no one should be surprised about Beijing's behavior. In the aftermath of the 921 earthquake, Beijing adamantly demanded that all countries who wanted to help with the relief work and all groups intending to make donations to Taiwan had to first obtain its permission.
No one could take Beijing's claims of helping Taiwan in the present crisis seriously. Just look well it has taken care of its own people.
Contrast Beijing's efforts with those of Washington. The US CDC was quick to offer assistance and it currently has seven people helping out here. Even the WHO's token help, although belated, is still heart-warming. Isn't it obvious who is a friend and who is a foe?
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS