Taiwan's bid for full WHO membership was thwarted on Monday after the World Health Assembly (WHA) adopted a motion by a vote of 148 to 17 to exclude the issue from its agenda.
China was quick to hail the decision as a political victory backing its claims to Taiwan. Beijing's attitude made it amply clear that China viewed the issue as political from the start and that it was not concerned about the health rights of Taiwanese.
However, those who voted against Taiwan's bid for full membership in the WHO cannot simply wash their hands and walk away. They are equally guilty of turning a blind eye to the rights of 23 million people and for leaving a missing link in the global health framework by yielding to political pressure and excluding Taiwan.
The organization as a whole and its individual member states seem unbothered by the contradiction between a body's mandate to prioritize global health issues -- above political agendas -- and blocking an entire nation from that body.
China and its supporters argue that Taiwan is not left out of the network because China has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the WHO, magnanimously promising to look after Taiwanese.
Forget politics. The reality of Taiwan's health system is that it is completely and utterly independent of China. The French might as well promise to protect the health of Germans.
Chinese Health Minister Gao Qiang (
What many do not know or choose to ignore is that the MOU restricts Taiwan's right to attend WHO forums and workshops on the latest developments in the diagnosis and control of pandemics and other vital issues. It also restricts the status of officials Taiwan is allowed to send and grants China the authority to approve or reject Taiwan's applications to attend workshops.
China has repeatedly delayed its approval of Taiwan's applications, even when turned in needlessly early, so that the Taiwanese representatives would not receive the go-ahead in time to take part in these conferences.
The SARS outbreak in 2003 claimed 73 lives in Taiwan, making it the country with the third-highest number of deaths after China and Hong Kong. Taiwan was forced to cope with SARS alone for about two months before the WHO sent two health experts to help deal with the crisis. Bizarrely, the WHO had to wait for the go-ahead from Beijing officials that have no control over Taiwan's health system and other agencies that were involved in containing the SARS virus.
How long will the WHO and its member states allow Taiwan to remain in this untenable position? One way or another, Taiwan is better off without China's magnanimity.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS