China's State Councillor Tang Jiaxuan (
It is no secret that the biggest obstacle to Taiwan's long overdue participation in the WHO is Beijing. Taiwan has every right to join the WHO as a member or, at the very least, an observer to begin with. If removing itself as the roadblock to Taiwan's WHO entry is the "help" to which Tang referred, then everyone who is beaten by a bully should thank the bully after the beating stops. What kind of twisted logic is this?
Beijing's so-called "help" -- assuming that it really happens -- isn't being offered out of the goodness of its heart. It has more to do with the overwhelming international pressure mounting as a result of passage of the "Anti-Secession" Law. Under the circumstances, Beijing feels compelled to offer a facade of"goodwill" to ease international condemnation.
If Taiwan owed anyone gratitude, it would be countries such as the US and Japan, which not only voted in favor of Taiwan's participation during last year's World Health Assembly (WHA) but voiced concern about the Anti-Secession Law, and the European Parliament, which on Thursday adopted a resolution in support of Taiwan's WHO participation.
Under the circumstances, for the KMT claim any credit for the so-called "help" offered by China is truly shameless. After all, didn't KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
Besides, it is hard to tell -- based on the ambiguous statements of Tang revealed so far -- whether this "help" is a sugar-coated poison after all. If Beijing's idea of "participation" by Taiwan is for Taipei to dispatch some representatives to join the Chinese delegation to the WHA, then thanks, but no thanks. Beijing had tried to pull similar stunts before -- inviting individuals from Taiwan to join a Chinese delegation. That kind of "participation" is of course completely meaningless, since Taiwan and China are under completely separate governments and health systems.
Then there is also the scenario that Taiwan could join an international organization as either an observer or member under the name of "Taiwan, China," or some other name that suggest Taiwan is part of China or that concede to Beijing "one China" principle. If that is the case, then the KMT not only is undeserving of any gratitude from the Taiwanese people, but should be condemned for selling them out.
The main reason that the cross-strait relationship has been at an impasse in recent years is that Beijing insists any official cross-strait dialogue must be conditioned on Taiwan's acceptance of its "one China" principle. If the price that Taiwan is asked to pay for its WHO participation is this, then Taiwan simply must decline.
Even if Taiwan cannot join under the name of "Republic of China," "Taiwan," or any other name that indicates its sovereign status, it should at the very least be allowed to join as an independent health entity and be accorded independent membership or observer status.
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to