So there’s this senior official who is having an affair. He goes to a hotel where he gets up to things he would prefer no one else found out about. There, he is caught with his pants down, so to speak, and he scrambles around for a team of defense lawyers. He finds a team of three. Lawyer One tries to play the whole thing down, saying the official’s predecessor had got up to the same thing. Lawyer Two gets all sanctimonious about the fact that this was a secret rendezvous, demanding the head of the Judas who leaked the story. Lawyer Three opts for diversionary tactics, saying they got the lady’s name wrong, they used her husband’s surname — that’s not very polite, is it?
It’s a great story, and one which illustrates remarkably well the government’s response to the leaked WHO memo requiring that Taiwan be referred to as “Taiwan, province of China.” The whole “affair” adds an interesting spin to the centenary of the Republic of China (ROC).
Only Minister of Foreign Affairs Timothy Yang (楊進添), knowing that he could not deny the existence of the memo and trying to contain the fallout, was sufficiently quick off the mark to say that the memo was of a “confidential” nature, not for the eyes of unauthorized personnel. The WHO is currently investigating how the memo was leaked.
The government was aware of the existence of the memo, as was China, of course, as it was behind the whole thing in the first place.
Therefore, it was no secret to either the government here or in Beijing. In fact, they made it confidential in order to keep it from the very people who should have been told about it — the Taiwanese.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) may well clench his fists and gnash his teeth, looking for all the world like he is “protesting,” but the question is, what exactly is it that he is protesting? At no point did he assert that Taiwan was not a province of China, or say that to claim it was did not comply with the facts. All he said was that this kind of behavior was unreasonable and unfair to the ROC, and that it was “inconsistent.”
Given that Ma accepts the “one China” principle, how can it possibly be unreasonable or unfair of the WHO to list Taiwan as a province of China? If he himself denies the state its dignity, how can he expect other people not to do the same thing?
The government does not dare point out the WHO’s error by emphasizing that Taiwan is not, in fact, a province of China. That the WHO maintains this, and has done so on several occasions, can really only have two explanations. The first is that China has made unilateral demands that the organization does so. The second is that the Ma administration has negotiated some form of secret agreement with China.
If Ma wants to prove his loyalty to Taiwan he should declare that he rejects the “one China” principle and point out that the term “Taiwan, province of China” is both erroneous and unacceptable. If he wants to demonstrate his loyalty to “100 years of the ROC,” he needs to release the records of all discussions, understandings and agreements struck by former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairmen Lien Chan (連戰) and Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄), as well as all the other envoys he has sent over to China, for public scrutiny.
There are no international treaties that hand sovereignty of Taiwan to China. That is an incontrovertible fact. Anyone two-faced enough to give the right sound bites when electioneering while selling out the country doing secret deals does not deserve the trust of the electorate.
James Wang is a commentator based in Taipei.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Taiwan’s fall would be “a disaster for American interests,” US President Donald Trump’s nominee for undersecretary of defense for policy Elbridge Colby said at his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday last week, as he warned of the “dramatic deterioration of military balance” in the western Pacific. The Republic of China (Taiwan) is indeed facing a unique and acute threat from the Chinese Communist Party’s rising military adventurism, which is why Taiwan has been bolstering its defenses. As US Senator Tom Cotton rightly pointed out in the same hearing, “[although] Taiwan’s defense spending is still inadequate ... [it] has been trending upwards
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
In an eloquently written piece published on Sunday, French-Taiwanese education and policy consultant Ninon Godefroy presents an interesting take on the Taiwanese character, as viewed from the eyes of an — at least partial — outsider. She muses that the non-assuming and quiet efficiency of a particularly Taiwanese approach to life and work is behind the global success stories of two very different Taiwanese institutions: Din Tai Fung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). Godefroy said that it is this “humble” approach that endears the nation to visitors, over and above any big ticket attractions that other countries may have
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS