As government officials have said, the WHO does not have any permanent observers, but the organization’s legal advisers say that a “semi-permanent” observer mechanism has been developed and that these observers are invited by the World Health Assembly (WHA) director-general to participate in the WHA each year. This is a significant difference.
These observers are divided into three groups. The Vatican is the only “non-member state observer.” Then there are “observers” that are selected and invited by the director-general, including the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. These observers are not countries.
The third category consists of observers invited in accordance with WHA resolutions Nos. 27 and 37. The Palestinian territories are the only observer in this category and require the special step of an invitation by the general assembly.
It would be difficult for China to accept Taiwan as a non-member state observer because this would be a form of dual recognition. Since the Taiwanese government has also repeatedly rejected the option of dual recognition, following the example of the Vatican is not feasible.
The model of the Palestinian territories, on the other hand, avoids the question of national status altogether, leaving a gray area for Taipei and Beijing to each interpret in their own way. This tallies with the government’s policy of pursuing neither independence nor unification, and, based on a WHA resolution, future directors-general would be required to invite Taiwan each year.
To achieve this, a WHA resolution would be necessary, but none of Taiwan’s allies has submitted a motion to the general assembly, which means that the chances for a resolution are slim.
The other option is for Taiwan to become a non-state observer on an annual basis at the invitation of the director-general. The regulations state that such an observer is not a country and there is no room for interpretation. Although the director-general invites these entities annually according to convention, he or she does not have an obligation to do so. Taiwan’s situation is unique and could not be treated as routine.
Accepting this observer status would be tantamount to denying that Taiwan is a country, since the WHO Secretariat would invite Taiwan as an observer based on the memorandum of understanding that it signed with Beijing in 2005. And yet, even if Taiwan belittled itself in this manner, the secretariat would be under no obligation to invite it. How would Taiwan react if the secretariat found some pretext to snub it?
I urge the government not to make reckless decisions simply for domestic political goals lest Taiwan’s international position be dealt another damaging blow.
Chiang Huang-chih is an associate professor in the Department of Law at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals
RSS