Late on May 11, I left for Geneva, Switzerland, with officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Overseas Chinese Affairs Commission. We were setting out to try to win acceptance for Taiwanese membership in the WHO.
This was the third time during my term as director of the Department of Health that I participated in the struggle with the World Health Assembly (WHA). This year, we applied for full WHO membership under the name "Taiwan," which made the debate on Taiwan's bid, in which two of our allies spoke on the nation's behalf against two of China's allies, even more complicated than in the past. Although Taiwan's media prefer to emphasize the outcome of the General Assembly vote -- 148 to 17 -- I feel that the results of this year's effort were far more significant than in the past.
Taiwan has attempted to obtain WHA observer status for 10 years, so this is not a new issue. At the WHA meeting on May 14, however, health ministers or representatives from 182 countries, UN agencies, major non-governmental organizations, as well as major international media outlets, more than 2000 people in all, spent more than three hours debating in depth whether Taiwan should be given WHO membership.
During these three hours, ministers or representatives of Taiwan's diplomatic allies spoke, and ministers or representatives of the US, Japan, Canada, Germany, Russia, India and other countries gave attentive thought to the positive and negative aspects of Taiwanese WHO membership as they listened to representatives of almost 50 countries discussing Taiwan's position.
Never in international medical circles has such careful consideration and such open and balanced debate been dedicated to Taiwan's international status or its medical contributions to developing countries.
Although China had mobilized supporters like Cuba and Pakistan to issue statements blocking Taiwanese membership and less than half the final vote was cast in support of Taiwan, representatives of many developed countries stated openly after the vote that they supported Taiwan's right to participation and representation in the WHA.
After the meeting, they also praised and congratulated Taiwan. Although Taiwan still hasn't won the support of a majority of member states, almost all representatives of individual countries support the idea that there should be opportunities for communication, contacts and cooperation between Taiwan and the WHO.
Taiwan's efforts to obtain meaningful participation have also been given the support of many countries, but pressure from China has made some countries reticent to openly support Taiwan's direct and immediate cooperation with the WHO, not to mention membership.
The WHO membership application may be Taiwan's most important moment in the international limelight each year, but Taiwan's medical professionals never cease to see the attempts to become a contributor to international health as a duty and an honor. The best example of this attitude is the Taiwan International Health Action, which was established last year.
Although the curtain has fallen on this year's WHA, Taiwan's medical professionals and the public at large will continue to move forward, manifesting the concern of the Taiwanese people and the professionalism and advancement of Taiwan's health professionals by sharing this concern and professionalism with people around the world, while at the same time working for Taiwan's acceptance into the WHO next year.
Hou Sheng-mou is the minister of the Department of Health.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and Perry Svensson
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