When US President Donald Trump pointed the finger at the WHO, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus did not face the music; instead, to distract from the mounting pressure, he groundlessly claimed that he was personally attacked by Taiwan with racial discrimination.
The outrageous accusation has stirred scads of uproar in vibrant Taiwanese society.
The backfire was presented as a full-page advertisement in the New York Times. After several hours, the WHO highlighted 13 points with misleading pieces of information to gainsay the ad.
Apparently, the WHO has spent time preparing to fight against the Taiwan issue, even though Taiwan had no intention to start a war in the first place.
When an NHK journalist raised a question about Taiwan at an international news conference, again, the pundits of the WHO showed how ready they were to retort questioning voices.
The WHO’s swift management on matters about Taiwan left many wondering why it could not have exhibited this kind of efficient executive ability when the COVID-19 pandemic was still in the nascent stage.
The WHO could have taken many measures if it were truly professional and politically neutral; unfortunately, they dropped the ball from the beginning.
It is natural for an international public organization to be supervised, especially in an era of pandemic, but when the onslaught of criticism flooded the WHO, the leader did not reflect on his dereliction of duty, but chose to evade the blame.
Tedros keeps professing the compassionate tenets of the WHO, but has already betrayed the core value of humanity. It is far beyond disappointing to witness the WHO so paralyzed in this pandemic.
He is actually not the scourge of the tragedy. He is just a symbolic figure who represents how one country’s infiltration can damage an essential organization that is supposed to be purely led by professional and objective judgements.
There are many like him losing political neutrality scattered throughout the WHO.
Together, the loss of political neutrality and China’s lack of transparency have contributed to this disaster, throwing the world into a suffering hell.
The WHO’s blindness to China likely hushing up the true pandemic status should be reflected on; as should the panels’ clouded and delayed guidance.
The relationship between China and the WHO should be scrutinized. It is crystal clear that this incompetent organization needs an overhaul.
For Taiwan, the upside is that the WHO is finally forced to officially communicate with it, which used to be taboo.
The WHO gathers worldwide medical elites and has an extraordinary foundation to do its work, but it spoiled the resources to bark up the wrong tree.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ statements from 2009 to last year show that Taiwan was allowed to attend only 30 percent of technical meetings and was rejected without reason from the rest; the regional office for the Western Pacific barely provides Taiwan any relevant health information; and the development of Taiwanese vaccines has been deterred because the WHO would not recognize them.
Taiwan’s situation is a far cry from comprehensive participation in the WHO. If someone claims that there is no need for Taiwan to have membership because China owns it and has taken good care of it, they must either be lying or have been fooled.
Taiwan is poised to be a part of the medical community. The WHO should make no mistake that a pandemic cannot isolate Taiwan from the world, but its political prejudice can.
It is a moment of reflection for the WHO and if it must spend some precious time going after a particular nation, Taiwan is the last one it should single out.
Janet Hung is a physical therapist.
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