When US President Donald Trump pointed the finger at the WHO, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus did not face the music; instead, to distract from the mounting pressure, he groundlessly claimed that he was personally attacked by Taiwan with racial discrimination.
The outrageous accusation has stirred scads of uproar in vibrant Taiwanese society.
The backfire was presented as a full-page advertisement in the New York Times. After several hours, the WHO highlighted 13 points with misleading pieces of information to gainsay the ad.
Apparently, the WHO has spent time preparing to fight against the Taiwan issue, even though Taiwan had no intention to start a war in the first place.
When an NHK journalist raised a question about Taiwan at an international news conference, again, the pundits of the WHO showed how ready they were to retort questioning voices.
The WHO’s swift management on matters about Taiwan left many wondering why it could not have exhibited this kind of efficient executive ability when the COVID-19 pandemic was still in the nascent stage.
The WHO could have taken many measures if it were truly professional and politically neutral; unfortunately, they dropped the ball from the beginning.
It is natural for an international public organization to be supervised, especially in an era of pandemic, but when the onslaught of criticism flooded the WHO, the leader did not reflect on his dereliction of duty, but chose to evade the blame.
Tedros keeps professing the compassionate tenets of the WHO, but has already betrayed the core value of humanity. It is far beyond disappointing to witness the WHO so paralyzed in this pandemic.
He is actually not the scourge of the tragedy. He is just a symbolic figure who represents how one country’s infiltration can damage an essential organization that is supposed to be purely led by professional and objective judgements.
There are many like him losing political neutrality scattered throughout the WHO.
Together, the loss of political neutrality and China’s lack of transparency have contributed to this disaster, throwing the world into a suffering hell.
The WHO’s blindness to China likely hushing up the true pandemic status should be reflected on; as should the panels’ clouded and delayed guidance.
The relationship between China and the WHO should be scrutinized. It is crystal clear that this incompetent organization needs an overhaul.
For Taiwan, the upside is that the WHO is finally forced to officially communicate with it, which used to be taboo.
The WHO gathers worldwide medical elites and has an extraordinary foundation to do its work, but it spoiled the resources to bark up the wrong tree.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ statements from 2009 to last year show that Taiwan was allowed to attend only 30 percent of technical meetings and was rejected without reason from the rest; the regional office for the Western Pacific barely provides Taiwan any relevant health information; and the development of Taiwanese vaccines has been deterred because the WHO would not recognize them.
Taiwan’s situation is a far cry from comprehensive participation in the WHO. If someone claims that there is no need for Taiwan to have membership because China owns it and has taken good care of it, they must either be lying or have been fooled.
Taiwan is poised to be a part of the medical community. The WHO should make no mistake that a pandemic cannot isolate Taiwan from the world, but its political prejudice can.
It is a moment of reflection for the WHO and if it must spend some precious time going after a particular nation, Taiwan is the last one it should single out.
Janet Hung is a physical therapist.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
The Central Election Commission (CEC) on Friday announced that recall motions targeting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安) have been approved, and that a recall vote would take place on July 26. Of the recall motions against 35 KMT legislators, 31 were reviewed by the CEC after they exceeded the second-phase signature thresholds. Twenty-four were approved, five were asked to submit additional signatures to make up for invalid ones and two are still being reviewed. The mass recall vote targeting so many lawmakers at once is unprecedented in Taiwan’s political history. If the KMT loses more
Taiwan’s unconditional support “for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India to safeguard national security and fight terrorist forces that cross borders to attack innocent civilians” marked a monumental shift in the relationship between Taipei and New Delhi. At a time when the Indian government sent several delegations of parliament members to convey to the rest of the world Pakistan’s role in sponsoring terrorism against India, Taiwan became one of the few nations that unequivocally supported India’s military operation, “Sindhoor.” Sure, this change in bilateral ties did not happen in a vacuum. Over the past decade,
RSS