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.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS