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?
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS