The vote on Monday that blocked Taiwan's application for observer status at the WHO may have looked one-sided, but actually it was a very good result.
It began with about 50 Taiwanese demonstrating for their country before the Palais des Nations in Geneva, where the World Health Assembly (WHA) meets. Brought together by the Taiwan Presbyterian Church, the demonstrators held up banners and offered leaflets to cars entering the grounds.
Inside, at the agenda-setting General Committee, a number of countries called for the addition of Taiwan's application to the WHA agenda. A number spoke against adding the item. The debate seesawed back and forth for almost two hours.
In the end, as expected, the Pakistani chairman declared that since there was no consensus, he would not recommend adding Taiwan's application to the agenda.
This set the stage for a three-hour debate, which opened with the delegate from Gambia demanding that the question be re-examined so that Taiwan's voice could be heard at the WHO. Representatives from 17 democracies (including, for the first time, the US) spoke for Taiwan. On the other side, support for Beijing began with Cuba and concluded with Algeria.
In between, in addition to China itself, the list included such freedom-loving countries as North Korea, Yemen, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Belarus. It resembled a list of the world's worst violators of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
But the Chinese delegate must be complimented for exceptional nerve and daring. He actually claimed that because of the Chinese government's great love for the people of its "province," it would give them all the healthcare and health services they could possibly require -- meaning that they require no contact with the WHO. Of course, he continued, should Taiwanese authorities accept the sacred "one China" principle, they could even have direct access to the WHO itself. That there was a basic contradiction between the two statements eluded him.
When the votes were tallied, Taiwan had 25 supporters, a total that included (for the first time) the US and Japan. Israel and the Philippines abstained. The other side had 133 votes, a number which on first sight looks huge. But had efforts been successful to persuade the EU countries not to vote as a bloc against the amendment, the total would have looked quite different. If they had abstained, the total would have been more like 100 to 25. And since a simple majority of countries voting yea or nay is what is required, a swing of an additional 25 votes would have meant outright victory for Taiwan.
It is a tough battle. There are 192 members of the UN. Here at Geneva 140 actually turned up. Of that number, about 55 can be considered countries where the government governs with the consent of the people. The next task must be to enroll all 55 of them in democracy's cause.
Harvey Feldman is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS