Since taking office in May, obtaining observer status for Taiwan at the World Health Assembly (WHA) has been trumpeted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government as a top diplomatic task and a barometer of cross-strait relations. The nation’s bid this year, if successful, would indicate “goodwill” from China, the KMT government has said, apprently hoping for a positive outcome at the WHA session this May amid ostensibly warming cross-strait relations.
While the government’s efforts in that regard should be acknowledged, there is, however, more here than meets the eye and failure to scrutinize the deal could have serious long-term implications for the nation’s sovereignty.
There is no such thing as WHA “observer status” in the WHO Constitution. The so-called WHA observership appears in the WHO’s Rules of Procedure. According to Rule 47 of the Rules of the Procedure of the WHA, “Observers of invited non-Member States and territories on whose behalf application for associate membership has been made may attend any open meetings of the Health Assembly or any of its main committees. They may, upon the invitation of the President, and with the consent of the Health Assembly or committee, make a statement on the subject under discussions.”
In other words, as long as China is in a good mood, a nod from Beijing would enable Taiwan to attend a WHA session as an observer. One detail that is often overlooked, however, is that observer status is a one-time event, meaning that even if Taiwan were granted the status this year, there is no guarantee it would be allowed in the following year. Everything, therefore, hinges on whether Beijing opposes the measure at a given time.
The question is, therefore: How much is Taiwan willing to demean itself if Chinese “goodwill” means having to beg, year after year, for crumbs from Beijing?
The implications for President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) ability to act as head of state are severe, as he could find himself having to give a little more to China each year to be allowed into the WHA. In such a scenario, the great diplomatic accomplishment would be nothing more than abdication, turning the nation into a beggar and, by contrast, Beijing into a gatekeeper.
To avoid giving the international community the impression that Taiwan is nothing more than a pawn of China — or part of it — Taipei must continue seeking full membership at the WHO, as was done under the previous administration.
It is one thing to compromise as part of a strategy to gain international space. But any compromise must not cross the line into threatening or eroding the nation’s sovereignty.
Without sovereignty, there is simply no international space. If Taiwan is to forsake its national dignity in seeking an international presence, it might as well declare itself part of China, in which case international recognition would be a moot point.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS