Kudos to Taiwanese student Huang Hai-ning (黃海寧) and her fellow protesters for confronting Department of Health Minister Yeh Ching-chuan (葉金川) over his dubious representation of Taiwan at the ongoing World Health Assembly (WHA) meeting in Geneva.
As a seasoned politician, Yeh’s angry reaction to the students’ simple question was dumbfounding.
“In what capacity is Taiwan attending the WHA?” they asked.
Rather than responding to the students’ legitimate query with political savvy and civility, Yeh dodged the question. He first challenged Huang to speak in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese) to prove she was Taiwanese and then asked why he should answer her question.
Yeh asked: “Who loves Taiwan more than I do?” He then launched into a tirade, pointing a finger at Huang and saying “shame on you” and “people like you are useless.” She had caused Taiwan to lose face, he said.
Why was the minister so ticked off over one simple question?
The Presidential Office has stuck by its claim that it knows nothing about the existence of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between China and the WHO stipulating that communication between the global health body and Taiwan can only take place with Beijing’s consent. Yeh, however, has admitted that he knows of the MOU, which was signed in 2005. As the nation’s representative to the WHA, he has the responsibility to respond to the concerns of the Taiwanese public, overseas or not.
Many remember how former minister of finance Shirley Kuo (郭婉容) surprised and impressed the international community when she stood silently with arms folded in protest as the Chinese national anthem was played at the Asian Development Bank (ADB) meeting in Beijing in 1989.
Many also recall how Taiwan’s representatives to the meetings of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) — the precursor of the WTO — under the administration of president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) protested against Chinese attempts to block or intervene against its application to join the world trade body.
As late as May 6 last year, central bank Governor Perng Fai-nan (彭淮南) continued the tradition of protesting the ADB’s unilateral changing of Taiwan’s designation to “Taipei, China” in 1985 by including it in his speech at the bank’s meeting in Madrid.
Even President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) on Sept. 6, 2007 — as the presidential candidate of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — cited Taiwan’s participation in the ADB as an example of how Taiwan made its voice heard.
As Yeh himself said on Monday, the nation’s participation at the WHA has drawn a lot of attention from the international press. But if he is “proud of Taiwan” as he says, he should take the opportunity to let the world know that Taiwan is Taiwan — and not embrace the title “Chinese Taipei.”
Yeh had the courage to chide the Taiwanese students, but he didn’t have the courage to voice even one small protest during his speech at the WHA yesterday.
Let the public be the judge on who has behaved appropriately in this incident — overseas Taiwanese students who insist that Taiwan participate in the WHA with its dignity intact, or a Cabinet official who stays silent and falls apart when called on his behavior.
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS