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.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
To recalibrate its Cold War alliances, the US adopted its “one China policy,” a diplomatic compromise meant to engage with China and end the Vietnam War, but which left Taiwan in a state of permanent limbo. Half a century later, the costs of that policy are mounting. Taiwan remains a democratic, technologically advanced nation of 23 million people, yet it is denied membership in international organizations and stripped of diplomatic recognition. Meanwhile, the PRC has weaponized the “one China” narrative to claim sovereignty over Taiwan, label the Taiwan Strait as its “internal waters” and threaten international shipping routes that carry more
RSS