Taiwan's bid for full WHO membership was thwarted on Monday after the World Health Assembly (WHA) adopted a motion by a vote of 148 to 17 to exclude the issue from its agenda.
China was quick to hail the decision as a political victory backing its claims to Taiwan. Beijing's attitude made it amply clear that China viewed the issue as political from the start and that it was not concerned about the health rights of Taiwanese.
However, those who voted against Taiwan's bid for full membership in the WHO cannot simply wash their hands and walk away. They are equally guilty of turning a blind eye to the rights of 23 million people and for leaving a missing link in the global health framework by yielding to political pressure and excluding Taiwan.
The organization as a whole and its individual member states seem unbothered by the contradiction between a body's mandate to prioritize global health issues -- above political agendas -- and blocking an entire nation from that body.
China and its supporters argue that Taiwan is not left out of the network because China has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the WHO, magnanimously promising to look after Taiwanese.
Forget politics. The reality of Taiwan's health system is that it is completely and utterly independent of China. The French might as well promise to protect the health of Germans.
Chinese Health Minister Gao Qiang (
What many do not know or choose to ignore is that the MOU restricts Taiwan's right to attend WHO forums and workshops on the latest developments in the diagnosis and control of pandemics and other vital issues. It also restricts the status of officials Taiwan is allowed to send and grants China the authority to approve or reject Taiwan's applications to attend workshops.
China has repeatedly delayed its approval of Taiwan's applications, even when turned in needlessly early, so that the Taiwanese representatives would not receive the go-ahead in time to take part in these conferences.
The SARS outbreak in 2003 claimed 73 lives in Taiwan, making it the country with the third-highest number of deaths after China and Hong Kong. Taiwan was forced to cope with SARS alone for about two months before the WHO sent two health experts to help deal with the crisis. Bizarrely, the WHO had to wait for the go-ahead from Beijing officials that have no control over Taiwan's health system and other agencies that were involved in containing the SARS virus.
How long will the WHO and its member states allow Taiwan to remain in this untenable position? One way or another, Taiwan is better off without China's magnanimity.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS