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.
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”
RSS