China, SARS and the WHO
Blackmail aside, no one in the world can possibly agree with Beijing's policy that Taiwan must be excluded from the World Health Organization (WHO) because it is a renegade province of China. That position is purely political (regardless of China's claim that it "owns" Taiwan) and has nothing to do with world health.
In fact, if a truly secret ballot were taken, there is no doubt the vote to permit Taiwan to enter the WHO (or the UN, for that matter) would be nearly unanimous. It is time for the world to speak with one voice on this subject, instead of bowing to China's blackmail.
Beijing has vowed that politics should not enter the WHO. It has accused Taiwan of "politicizing" SARS, but of course it is China's political maneuvering that created the spread of the SARS epidemic in the first place, and it is China which has politicized Taiwan's plea to be included in the world's solutions to and treatment of SARS, and any other international health questions.
If the WHO is truly an apolitical association dedicated to world health, as its Constitution demands ("The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition"), then the relationship of Taiwan and its 23 million people with China should not be an issue.
A country known mostly for its heavy-handed brutality when it comes to human rights and transparency should not be permitted to squelch the health needs of the entire population of Taiwan. If China is wrong in its "political land grab" for Taiwan, its position on Taiwan's joining the WHO is heinous because it jeopardizes the health of tens of millions of people. Either way, China is wrong.
If the world speaks with one voice, China will not be able to complain against any single entity, because unanimity speaks volumes. In face of unanimous opposition to its marginalization of Taiwan in the WHO, China must withdraw its opposition (which ought to embarrass it by now) and go along with allowing Taiwan to help its people fight against this scourge that China so callously exported to the world even as it hid its severity. Nothing less is acceptable.
The world is watching right now to see that the WHO does the right thing. Is it willing? Is it brave enough? WHO members must hold a secret ballot under Article 60 of the organization's Constitution, which requires only a simple majority of those present and voting to admit Taiwan. Are the blackmailed brave enough to vote yes? To abstain? Even if China is the only member to vote, it would highlight China's perfidy against the Taiwanese people and its callous disregard for the world's health.
Lee Long-hwa
Pasadena, California
The DPA article ("Who will stand up for Taiwan?" May 17, page 9) has raised a good question. The only answer for Taiwan is to stand up for itself before our allies can be expected to stand up for us. This is true in all cases, including membership in the WHO and the UN.
Taiwan has suffered from a split personality in every respect, domestically and internationally. While many people speak for Taiwan, some politicians and legislators are speaking as if they represented China instead. This is far from what democracy is all about. Have you ever heard anyone saying that the US is part of the UK? Why can't Taiwan and China be more like the US and the UK?
The conflicting situation in Taiwan is a threat to democracy. It is also utterly confusing to the entire world, including Taiwanese. Nobody can figure out what Taiwan really wants.
Like it or not, China has invaded Taiwan -- epidemically. The taste of being a second Hong Kong is deadly. Taiwan should be able to overcome SARS very soon with its own efforts and with help from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the WHO. No one in the world is expecting a helping hand from China, where SARS originated.
After defeating SARS clinically in the very near future, Taiwan still has to face China politically, economically, diplomatically and militarily. Taiwan must stand up and be strong.
Charles Hong
Columbus, Ohio
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry