In the meeting between Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
As members of the Foundation of Medical Professionals Alliance, a non-governmental organization (NGO) spearheading the advocacy of Taiwan's WHO entry bid, we firmly oppose Taiwan's WHO participation being based unrealistically on China's "consent and help." The reasons are three-fold:
First, if we were willing to make concessions to join the WHO with China's "consent," we could have long since become a member. According to chapter three of the WHO's constitution, there can be three types of WHO participants: member, associate member and observer.
Full membership is open to members of the UN. Associate membership is open to colonial or self-governing territories. As for observership, there is no standard criteria -- observers can be a sovereign nation, a quasi-sovereign nation or an NGO.
From Beijing's perspective, Taiwan is a province of China; therefore, Taiwan can be admitted to the WHO only if China files an associate membership application on Taiwan's behalf, or if individual Taiwanese medical professionals join China's WHO delegation. But this would relegate Taiwan to the position of being a colony of China.
Even the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region under China's "one country, two systems" policy is no more than an associate member, so if Taiwan accepts China's conditions, its status will be degraded to that of Hong Kong.
Taiwan, after all, has a full-fledged governmental health department, which has the ability to exercise public power. It is not an NGO. And even if Taiwan were to enter the WHO as an NGO, its troubles would be far from over, as China may continue to raise obstacles and undermine Taiwan's status as a sovereign nation in cases where public power is used to intervene in international health issues.
Second, health statistics for each side of the Taiwan Strait are quite different. Taiwan and China have been separated for more than a century, and there are tremendous cross-strait divergences.
China's overall health system performance ranks 144th among 191 WHO member states. Therefore, joining the Chinese delegation to the WHO would not satisfy Taiwanese people's healthcare needs. Not to mention that in tackling an outbreak, there would surely be no time for Taiwan to wait for Beijing to release WHO information -- which has to pass through several layers of bureaucracy.
Third, yielding to China's conditions to facilitate Taiwan's WHO bid would be no different than endorsing China's lies at the WHO over the past years. Since Taiwan's initial advocacy in promoting its WHO participation, China has stood by the falsehood that it is helping Taiwan in many medical fields. We want to ask, when did China earmark any of its healthcare funds for Taiwan? Which of Taiwan's health research projects was funded by China?
In sum, Taiwan's WHO entry bid must not become a tool of cross-strait political rivalry. Rather, it should be the basic right of the 23 million Taiwanese people. If Taiwan joins the WHO on the premise of China's consent, Taiwan's healthcare contributions and achievements will all be taken by China as its own.
Wu Shuh-min is president of the Foundation of Medical Professionals Alliance.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS