No appeasing China
Taiwan's failure to enter the World Health Organization (WHO) as an observer is not just a result of realism in international politics. It is a reflection of the indifferent minds of politicians from all over the world, who turned a blind eye to the suffering of people in Taiwan in order to appease China -- the country that gave birth to the disease itself.
In this year's World Health Assembly, China's domineering opposition to including Taiwan in the global health network was supported by many countries. These countries thought that by appeasing China's disease concealment and demonstrating their ignorance of the right of Taiwanese people to live healthily, on the one hand, and rejecting Taiwan's request to participate in the enhancement of human health on the other, that SARS would, magically, never pass their national boundaries and threaten the lives of their own citizens.
Inconceivably, those countries believed that the political totem of "one sovereign Chi-nese state" upheld by China could eventually expel the evils that SARS brought upon the Taiwanese and that SARS is only happening in another reality that will never bring them any direct impact on their lives.
It seemed that the late British prime minister Neville Chamberlain's ghost lingered at the WHA through his speech delivered on Sept. 27, 1939: "However much we may sympathize with a small nation confronted by a big and powerful neighbor ? If we have to fight, it must be on larger issues than that."
What happened on Monday was not an unprecedented event in history, however. More than half a century ago, the same theme took place in a different story. In 1936, Adolf Hitler mobilized his troops and claimed victory over the Rhineland under the banner of "reoccupation" -- which differs from "invasion" only in political rhetoric. Though the German army was given strict orders to retreat in case of resistance, the world chose to be silent on German's military engagement.
To quench the tyrants' thirst for blood, Britain and France agreed to concede the Sudetenland within Czechoslovakia to Germany in 1939. Just before the outbreak of war, Western democracies finally realized that appeasement allowed Nazi Germany to become expansionary and unstoppable. However, it was too late.
Globalization entails increasing human contact and interaction. SARS can and will sneak through national boundaries and the international community will have to deal with it sooner or later.
Leaving Taiwan out in the cold is just another concession plan the world seems to enjoy, but it is as dangerous as leaving the Rhineland unguarded in a war against the Nazi blitzkrieg.
Taiwan should not be excluded from the WHO when it is fighting a disease that can threaten the lives of all humans. And Taiwan will keep voicing to the world in the same spirit that British prime minister sir Winston Churchill cried in his speech broadcast Feb. 9, 1941: "Put your confidence in us ? Give us the tools and we will finish the job."
John Wang
TSU legislator
Over the past few years, China has done quite a few shameful things in the UN to bolster its fictional claim to control Taiwan. When a horrible earthquake struck Taiwan in 1999, killing at least 2,000 people, China accepted condolences from the UN for the quake victims even though China itself did not send rescue teams and did not cancel its 50th national day celebrations to mourn the loss of its "Taiwan compatriots."
In the entire history of the UN, China has exercised four Security Council vetoes. Two dealt with resolving conflicts in Guatemala and Macedonia because both Guatemala and Macedonia were willing to have diplomatic relations with Taipei.
And now, China refuses to allow Taiwan to have observer status in the WHO, even though being a sovereign state is not a pre-requisite for such status. China claims that it can provide all of Taiwan's health needs. Yet when epidemics hit Taiwan, Taipei relies on the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for assistance.
It is ironic that while China is paranoid of Taiwan becoming a US protectorate, it is performing actions that effectively makes Taiwan a US health protectorate. Let us not forget that besides a formal declaration of independence, China has threatened to invade Taiwan if some big natural disaster strikes it or if it is occupied by foreign forces.
Allen Timothy Chang
Berkeley, California
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS