The name tag of Center for Disease Control Director General Su Ih-jen (蘇益仁), who headed Taiwan's delegation to the Global Conference on SARS held in Kuala Lumpur, carried the correct title of "Director-General CDC Taiwan" without the word "China" anywhere on it.
Meanwhile, PFP Legislator Kao Ming-chien (
During Taiwan's fight against the SARS epidemic, Kao amazingly displayed his double-faced tactics by oscillating between lawmaker and professor, between government official and individual.
He organized the so-called "cross-strait anti-SARS videoconferences" at the Legislative Yuan, in his capacity as a legislator, and then he joined China's delegation, in his capacity as a professor, to attend the WHO conference in Malaysia.
His attitude achieves the same purpose as Beijing's "one China" principle, which has different versions at home and abroad, in dealing with the Taiwan issue.
For Taiwan, Kao is a PFP legislator. For other countries Kao manifests in his actions that he is "part of China."
Although Kao emphasized that he is attending this week's conference as an individual who is part of China's delegation, this still might run counter to Taiwan's national interests.
It would be worthwhile asking legal experts' advice what should be done with Kao, given the following consideration.
First, China should not be discriminated against for being the origin of the SARS virus. But its uncivilized behavior in covering up the disease, hindering WHO experts from entering China to conduct investigations and misleading other nations' anti-SARS efforts should be denounced.
In particular, its neglect of the life and health of the people of Taiwan and its barbaric use of political tactics to thwart this nation's WHO entry bid invite nothing but repulsion.
As a SARS exporter, China has even repeatedly blocked Taiwan's efforts to contain the disease. If we liken the fight against SARS to a war, China can surely be described as an "enemy."
It is quite doubtful whether Kao's attendance as a representative of the "Chinese enemy," instead of being recommended by the Department of Health, should be dealt with according to Article 113 of Criminal Code.
This article states, "A person who without authority secretly agrees with a foreign government or its agent on matters which require the authorization of the government shall be punished with imprisonment for life or for not less than seven years."
Second, as a legislator, Kao's attendance at the conference as China's representative has violated Article 3 of the Legislators' Conduct Act (立法委員行為法), which stipulates that, "[Lawmakers] should be loyal to the country and foster the highest well-being of all the people." The legislature's discipline committee should handle appropriately this case.
Moreover, lawmakers are subject to the regulation stipulated in Article 20 of the Nationality Law (
Wang Sing-nan is a DPP legislator.
Translated by Jackie Lin
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