It is bad enough that China is maliciously trying to force Taiwan to “voluntarily” surrender its sovereignty to attend the annual World Health Assembly (WHA), but what is worse is that certain politicians sing along with the only nation that is openly hostile toward Taiwan.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs yesterday announced that the long-expected WHA invitation has finally arrived, yet, for the first time in history, UN Resolution 2758 and the “one China” principle are reported to have been specially noted on the invitation. This looks like manipulation by China to force president-elect Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration to recognize the so-called “1992 consensus.”
According to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), the “1992 consensus” refers to an agreement allegedly reached between China and the KMT government during talks in Singapore in 1992 that both sides would recognize that there is only “one China,” but each could make its own interpretation of what “China” means.
Of course, politics are involved in all international organizations, but it is malicious of China to force Taiwan to bow under political pressure to attend a meeting that is not political.
While it is not surprising that China would make such a move, it is disturbing that KMT politicians — including Presidential Office spokesman Charles Chen (陳以信) and KMT Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) — welcome such sugar-coated poison and even join Beijing in calling on the incoming administration to accept China’s conditions to attend the meeting.
It is disturbing because, despite the KMT’s and Ma’s claims about the “1992 consensus,” Beijing has insisted that the “consensus” is about recognizing that there is only “one China,” without having ever admitted that each side can have its own interpretation of what that means.
An internal document asks that the WHO refer to Taiwan as “Taiwan, Province of China,” instead of the nation’s official title in the WHA, “Chinese Taipei.”
It is even worse now that UN Resolution 2758, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1971, has been mentioned.
According to the resolution, after its passage, the UN would recognize that “the representatives of the Government of the People’s Republic of China are the only lawful representatives of China to the UN and that the People’s Republic of China is one of the five permanent members of the Security Council.”
This resolution stripped Taiwan — or the Taipei-based Republic of China regime — of its UN membership.
The original document said that the UN would “expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the UN and in all the organizations related to it.”
By mentioning Resolution 2758, the WHA — and China — is denying Taiwan’s existence — as an independent political entity. It is denying the existence of the “1992 consensus” as the KMT interprets it and it is denying the basis on which Ma claims to have built a more peaceful relationship across the Taiwan Strait.
It does not make sense that the KMT would welcome an invitation that puts Taiwan’s international status below even the KMT’s bottom line, and urge the Democratic Progressive Party to accept it.
The KMT should be the first to protest.
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
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
The Ministry of the Interior late last month released its report on homes that consumed low amounts of electricity in the second half of last year, offering a glimpse of the latest data on “vacant houses” — homes using less than 60 kilowatt-hours of electricity a month. The report showed that Taiwan had 914,196 vacant houses, or a vacancy rate of 9.79 percent, up from 9.32 percent in the first half of last year and the highest since 2008, when it was 9.81 percent. Of the nation’s 22 administrative areas, Lienchiang County (Matsu) had the highest vacancy rate at 17.4
RSS