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 failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Saturday is the day of the first batch of recall votes primarily targeting lawmakers of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The scale of the recall drive far outstrips the expectations from when the idea was mooted in January by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘). The mass recall effort is reminiscent of the Sunflower movement protests against the then-KMT government’s non-transparent attempts to push through a controversial cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014. That movement, initiated by students, civic groups and non-governmental organizations, included student-led protesters occupying the main legislative chamber for three weeks. The two movements are linked
RSS