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.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
RSS