Hong Kongers, not Chinese
Hong Kong is mainlandizing. My city is increasingly politically influenced by, and economically dependent on, the mainland. From the disappearance of book publishers to the proposed Hong Kong extradition bill, I once believed Hong Kong would be doomed to lose its autonomy completely.
Yet, I was wrong. In the most recent month, especially after witnessing a record “2 million” people march for civil rights, I have learnt that our city should not, and will not, stop at defense to defer or prevent Beijing’s political, social and legal intervention in local affairs.
Endeavors, and willingness, to collectively defend our civil liberties prompt the reinforcement of a unique identity — an identity that is exclusively owned by Hong Kong citizens — known as Hong Kongers. Proudly speaking, resisting the erosion of our civil liberties sets our city apart from the mainland.
These weeks, in response to social movements against the extradition bill, newspapers worldwide have divorced the term “Hong Kongers” from “Chinese” or “China.” These newspapers include US News in the US, the Guardian in the UK, the Vancouver Sun in Canada, the Economic Times in India and the Bangkok Post in Thailand.
These publications have lauded Hong Kongers’ defiant fight for civil rights and identity, while denouncing the Beijing and Hong Kong governments’ disrespect for the “one country, two systems” principles.
Despite the city mainlandizing, our organized, peaceful and desperate demonstrations against the extradition bill have strengthened our sense of belonging to Hong Kong, but not the mainland.
A University of Hong Kong survey released on Thursday last week showed that the percentage of local citizens identifying as Chinese fell to a record low since the handover in 1997.
In contrast, the percentage of local citizens identifying as Hong Kongers hit a record high from 1997 onward.
Yes, a vast majority of the Hong Kong population are Han Chinese. However, when Beijing speeds up the interference in local affairs, Hong Kongers must stay united and rant: “This is Hong Kong, not China! At least not yet!”
Jason Hung
Bangkok, Thailand
IHME and its mysterious data
On Monday last week, The Lancet, the leading medical journal, published an article titled “Mortality, Morbidity, and Risk Factors in China and Its Provinces, 1990–2017: a Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017.”
The study, led by coauthors from the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) presented a lot of epidemic data, highlighting the public health efforts made by the Chinese government.
Healthcare data from Taiwan, listed as one of the Chinese provinces, were also presented in the study.
Taiwan has never been governed by the People’s Republic of China. Taiwan has made its stride in public health as Taiwanese healthcare workers and academics over the years have dedicated themselves in this area.
One example is the area of alcoholism. Taiwan became the leading country in the study of alcoholism, as many of the Taiwanese studies have been published in international peer-reviewed journals.
For the past 70 years, Taiwan has established its own healthcare governance, medical care network and international scholarship, with no participation from the Chinese government.
Sadly, despite the success, Taiwan has been denied membership in the WHO, because the global body recognizes it as part of China.
The study published by The Lancet relies heavily on data, which the authors claimed to have gathered from the Global Health Data Exchange. However, these data are public records of the Ministry of Health and Welfare. The authors should have applied for their academic use.
Moreover, as Taiwan is not a member of the WHO, the nation’s official health data would not have been shared internationally. Since the publication of the article, Taiwanese health officials have been baffled by how these researchers obtained the data.
The study can be found here: www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)30427-1/fulltext.
It should also be noted that this IHME study was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Chen Chiao-chicy
Psychiatrist, Mackay Memorial Hospital and Mackay Medical College
A white elephant?
I read with complete amazement last week more information about the Taipei Dome (“Farglory needs to submit design on new capacity,” June 25, page 3).
I have been in Taipei for the past 15 months. A 55,000-seat stadium to play baseball softball and soccer at a cost of hundreds of billions of New Taiwan dollars.
Average baseball attendance in Taipei is 5,000 to 6,000 people. Average soccer game attendance I estimate would be 500 to 1,000 people.
When, if ever, is Taipei Dome going to be filled?
The only time baseball would get 55,000 people would be for a special game against the US. The only time soccer would get 55,000 people to a game is if Barcelona and Liverpool were to play.
How is the Taipei Dome not going to be a “white elephant?” Billions of taxpayer dollars to be filled maybe once every 10 years.
How does this get approval to be built?
Michael Lanyon
Taipei
After nine days of holidays for the Lunar New Year, government agencies and companies are to reopen for operations today, including the Legislative Yuan. Many civic groups are expected to submit their recall petitions this week, aimed at removing many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers from their seats. Since December last year, the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) passed three controversial bills to paralyze the Constitutional Court, alter budgetary allocations and make recalling elected officials more difficult by raising the threshold. The amendments aroused public concern and discontent, sparking calls to recall KMT legislators. After KMT and TPP legislators again
Taiwan faces complex challenges like other Asia-Pacific nations, including demographic decline, income inequality and climate change. In fact, its challenges might be even more pressing. The nation struggles with rising income inequality, declining birthrates and soaring housing costs while simultaneously navigating intensifying global competition among major powers. To remain competitive in the global talent market, Taiwan has been working to create a more welcoming environment and legal framework for foreign professionals. One of the most significant steps in this direction was the enactment of the Act for the Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals (外國專業人才延攬及僱用法) in 2018. Subsequent amendments in
US President Donald Trump on Saturday signed orders to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China effective from today. Trump decided to slap 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada as well as 10 percent on those coming from China, but would only impose a 10 percent tariff on Canadian energy products, including oil and electricity. Canada and Mexico on Sunday quickly responded with retaliatory tariffs against the US, while countermeasures from China are expected soon. Nevertheless, Trump announced yesterday to delay tariffs on Mexico and Canada for a month and said he would hold further talks with
Taiwan’s undersea cables connecting it to the world were allegedly severed several times by a Chinese ship registered under a flag of convenience. As the vessel sailed, it used several different automatic identification systems (AIS) to create fake routes. That type of “shadow fleet” and “gray zone” tactics could create a security crisis in Taiwan and warrants response measures. The concept of a shadow fleet originates from the research of Elisabeth Braw, senior fellow at the Washington-based Atlantic Council. The phenomenon was initiated by authoritarian countries such as Iran, North Korea and Russia, which have been hit by international economic