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.
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
China’s partnership with Pakistan has long served as a key instrument in Beijing’s efforts to unsettle India. While official narratives frame the two nations’ alliance as one of economic cooperation and regional stability, the underlying strategy suggests a deliberate attempt to check India’s rise through military, economic and diplomatic maneuvering. China’s growing influence in Pakistan is deeply intertwined with its own global ambitions. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative, offers China direct access to the Arabian Sea, bypassing potentially vulnerable trade routes. For Pakistan, these investments provide critical infrastructure, yet they also
RSS