A speech on Tuesday by Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi (
Obviously, Beijing decided to make the statement because the WHO had at last dispatched two experts to Taipei to help deal with the spread of SARS. The apparent point of Wu's remarks was to dampen our lifted spirits and quell rising hopes about Taiwan joining the world health body as a result of the arrival of these experts. This shows precisely the concern Beijing has about the health and well being of the people in Taiwan, or rather, its "Taiwanese comrades."
Exactly how much does Beijing care about the people here? Let the facts speak for themselves:
First, the biggest contribution China has made to the health of the people of Taiwan and the world lately is the transmission of the SARS virus. Thank you.
Second, Beijing's leadership deliberately concealed the outbreak of the epidemic, depriving people everywhere an opportunity to protect themselves from the sickness.
Third, even after the first case of SARS was reported in Taiwan on March 14, the government was unable to report it to the WHO -- let alone obtain any help -- because of China's sovereignty claim. In the end, the government finally managed to contact the WHO via the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US CDC). But precious time had already been lost.
Fourth, when the WHO finally decided to dispatch two experts to Taipei last weekend, Beijing decided that living under the threat of the SARS virus was not enough of a challenge for the Taiwanese. To add insult to injury, immediately after the New York Times reported on the dispatch of the WHO team (over Beijing's objections), the Xinhua News Agency reported that the Chinese government has decided to permit the WHO to send people to Taiwan.
The point of obtaining permission from a government would obviously be because it has any right to become involved in the first place. In the present case, it is truly puzzling how Beijing would be able to stop the WHO from sending people here, let alone why Taiwan would seek its approval. So why would Beijing's permission be needed?
But then again, no one should be surprised about Beijing's behavior. In the aftermath of the 921 earthquake, Beijing adamantly demanded that all countries who wanted to help with the relief work and all groups intending to make donations to Taiwan had to first obtain its permission.
No one could take Beijing's claims of helping Taiwan in the present crisis seriously. Just look well it has taken care of its own people.
Contrast Beijing's efforts with those of Washington. The US CDC was quick to offer assistance and it currently has seven people helping out here. Even the WHO's token help, although belated, is still heart-warming. Isn't it obvious who is a friend and who is a foe?
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS