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.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had
Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) last week made a rare visit to the Philippines, which not only deepened bilateral economic ties, but also signaled a diplomatic breakthrough in the face of growing tensions with China. Lin’s trip marks the second-known visit by a Taiwanese foreign minister since Manila and Beijing established diplomatic ties in 1975; then-minister Chang Hsiao-yen (章孝嚴) took a “vacation” in the Philippines in 1997. As Taiwan is one of the Philippines’ top 10 economic partners, Lin visited Manila and other cities to promote the Taiwan-Philippines Economic Corridor, with an eye to connecting it with the Luzon
RSS