I have to make a correction regarding the title "Did Biobank secure consent?" given to my letter (Letters, Aug. 12, page 8). This title is incorrect. I should have indicated more clearly in my letter that the research which Ko Ying-chin (葛應欽) and Li Shu-chuan (李淑絹) used in filing US Patent Application Number 20050170387 is from a research project not affiliated with the Taiwan Biobank. The biobank is still stalled in its implementation phases, which is why public relations methods such as proclamations to advancing Aboriginal health are being used.
I wanted to bring attention to two other major issues.
First, an important precedent is set by the patent application that uses research on Atayal Aborigines and there is a lack of debate regarding the ethical implications of this precedent. Second, Ko's interest in having filed this patent arguably conflicts with his position on the biobank implementation committee in which he will likely be considered an expert on Aboriginal health issues.
Therefore, with his interests in patent number 20050170387, Ko's participation in the biobank cannot be regarded as disinterested or neutral, and this constitutes a conflict of interest. It is just these sorts of issues that the biobank oversight committees have to make important decisions about. In closing, if Ko's appointment to the biobank's implementation committee is any indication, then the credibility of the biobank's pledges to maintain high ELSI (Ethical, Legal and Social Implications) standards with regards to protecting Taiwan Aboriginal rights is very limited.
Mark Munsterhjelm
Windsor, Canada
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with