WHO rally in Seattle

Rallying for WHO entry in Seattle on the 17th:

++++++++++++

For Immediate Release

June 16, 2008

Contacts:
Rebecca Lee 206-390-2839
CJ Wang 202-210-0436
Iris Ho 202-280-0166

TAIWANESE AMERICANS IN SEATTLE CALL UPON PACIFIC HEALTH SUMMIT TO SUPPORT TAIWAN'S INCLUSION IN THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (WHO)

On June 17, from 10:00AM until noon, Taiwanese Americans will rally in front of the Bell Harbor International Conference Center in Seattle urging participants in the Pacific Health Summit to put the issue of Taiwan's inclusion in the World Health Organization (WHO) on the summit's agenda.

Earlier this month, Dr. Bob Yang, the President of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA - www.fapa.org), a world-wide organization promoting freedom, democracy, human rights and international participation for the people of Taiwan, wrote a letter to each summit participant.

In the letter dated June 1 (See: below for full text), Dr. Yang wrote: "As world-renowned professionals in the fields of science and health, we trust that you are well aware of Taiwan's lack of access to the highest level of medical - and health information within the WHO network and that you are cognizant of Taiwan's generous contributions to the global campaigns on AIDS and other epidemic diseases."

The letter concludes: "We hope that you will bring up Taiwan's participation (or lack thereof) in the international health network during your meeting."

In Taiwan there is broad and strong public support for Taiwan's full membership in the WHO. In an opinion poll held in Taiwan last year, 94,9% of respondents expressed support for the nation's entry as a full member of the WHO under the name "Taiwan." (Source: Foundation of Medical Professionals Alliance in Taiwan, April 2007).

China, due to its unfounded territorial claims on Taiwan, has for the past decade been the main obstacle for Taiwan to join international organizations in general and the WHO in particular. Adding insult to injury, in 2005 the WHO and China concluded a bilateral Memorandum of Understanding that established specific procedures for the handling of information between the WHO and Taiwan. These procedures require the WHO to consult with the PRC before sending any medical information or assistance to Taiwan and to allow the PRC to determine whether such information is passed on to the Taiwanese health authorities at all.

This is all the more ironic, for in its charter, the WHO sets forth the objective of attaining the highest possible level of health for all people.

In the meantime, Rep. Dennis Moore (D-KS) issued an Extension of Remarks (See: below) in the Congressional Record dated May 23 concluding: "Taiwan's membership in the WHO is not only in the interest of the people of Taiwan , it is in the interest of the international community and the WHO itself: as the WHO stands to benefit significantly from the financial and technological contributions that Taiwan has to offer. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of Taiwan's inclusion in the World Health Organization."

Taiwan has sought observer status at the annual meeting of the WHO every year since 1997.

[Taiwan]

Text of China's UN smackdown of Ma

Here is the text of the entire letter from China on Taiwan's participation in UN specialized agencies, smacking down Ma:

++++++++++++

Letter dated 18 August 2008 from the Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General With reference to the letter submitted by Nauru, the Gambia and a very few other countries on 14 August 2008 on the so-called "Taiwan’s participation in the activities of United Nations specialized agencies", I have been instructed to solemnly state China’s position as follows:

1. By raising the so-called proposal on "Taiwan’s participation in the activities of United Nations specialized agencies", Nauru, the Gambia and a very few other countries intend to create "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan". This is a violation of China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and interference in China’s internal affairs, and is thus firmly opposed by the Chinese Government and people. Such practice runs counter to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations as well as the constitutions and statutes of specialized agencies of the United Nations system. It is also detrimental to the prevailing good momentum in the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations.

2. There is only one China in the world. No matter what changes occur in cross-Strait relations, China’s adherence to the one China principle will never change. For historical and other reasons, the mainland and the Taiwan region are not yet reunited, but the fact that the two sides belong to one and the same China has never changed. As China is the shared homeland of the Chinese people across the Taiwan Strait, the 23 million Taiwan compatriots are important components of the Chinese nation, and people on the two sides of the Strait share the same blood and destiny.

3. The United Nations and its specialized agencies are intergovernmental organizations composed only of sovereign States. This is clearly stipulated in the Charter of the United Nations and the constitutions and statutes of the specialized agencies. The so-called "principle of universality" is also based on sovereign States. As a part of China, Taiwan is not a sovereign State. The claim by a very few countries that specialized agencies should allow the Taiwan region to "participate" in their activities under the "principle of universality" is unfounded. Since 1993, the General Committee and successive sessions of the General Assembly have rejected the motion on the so-called "Taiwan’s participation" or "membership" in the United Nations tabled by a very few countries each year. Since 1997, the Executive Board of the World Health Organization (WHO) and successive sessions of the World Health Assembly have also rejected the motion tabled each year by a very few countries on Taiwan’s "membership" or "participation" in the World Health Assembly as an observer. Facts have amply proved that the Taiwan region is not eligible to "participate" in the activities of specialized agencies.

4. The Chinese Government attaches great importance to the well-being of the 23 million Taiwan compatriots and understands their aspiration for and feeling about participating in international activities. The Chinese Government is never opposed to commercial and cultural exchanges and cooperation between the Taiwan region and other parts of the world. In 2005, on the basis of the one China principle, the Chinese Government reached with the Secretariat of the World Health Organization a memorandum of understanding, which provides facilitation to medical experts of the Taiwan region in their participation in WHO technical conferences and activities. The Taiwan region has unfettered access to health and medical information of the World Health Organization. The Chinese Government has also adopted a fully flexible and constructive attitude towards Taiwan’s participation in multilateral activities in organizations such as the World Trade Organization and APEC.

5. Since March this year, thanks to the concerted efforts of people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, cross-Strait relations have shown a good momentum of improvement and development. Under the new circumstances, we will firmly adhere to the theme of peaceful development in cross-Strait relations, and continue to enhance our exchanges and cooperation in all areas. It is true that there are still some outstanding questions left over from history and some of them are hard nuts to crack for the time being. But we anticipate that the two sides will make joint efforts, under the one China principle, towards the establishment of a framework for peaceful development of cross-Strait relations and strive for a new prospect in the relationship.

As an internal affair of the Chinese people, the participation of Taiwan compatriots in international activities should be resolved through consultation by the Chinese people across the Taiwan Strait. We are fully confident that, so long as the two sides work together in a spirit of "building mutual trust, putting aside differences, seeking common ground and striving for a win-win result", we will surely be able to create conditions and find an appropriate solution through consultation.

6. The Chinese Government urges Nauru, the Gambia and a very few other countries to observe the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, especially the principles of respecting State sovereignty and territorial integrity and non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs, and comply with the constitutions and statutes of specialized agencies. We urge them to stop doing things that undermine China’s interests and hurt the feelings of the Chinese people, and refrain from creating obstacles to the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations. We hope Member States will continue to adhere to the one China principle, appreciate and support the efforts made by the Chinese Government to maintain peaceful development of cross-Strait relations, and work concertedly to safeguard peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region and the world as a whole.

I have the honour to request that the present letter be circulated as a document of the General Assembly, under item 112 of the provisional agenda.

(Signed) Wang Guangya
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary and Permanent Representative of the People’s Republic of China to the United Nations

++++++++++++++

Ma's policies to gain international space appear to be destined for failure, at least at this point. But observe how both the PRC and Ma use the same language in referring to Taiwan -- "Taiwan region" and "Chinese people on both sides of the Strait" etc. Scary.

[Taiwan]

Republican Platforms on Taiwan/East Asia: 2004-2012

A friend passed this around, look at the advances for 2012.

+++++++++++++

Republican Party platform, 2004

Across the Pacific
Republicans believe that, as in every region of the world, America's foreign policy in Asia starts with its allies: Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, and the Philippines. In the Asia-Pacific region, these alliances are bolstered by strong relationships with American friends such as Singapore, India, Indonesia, Taiwan, and New Zealand.
......
There are, however, other areas in which we have profound disagreements, including human rights, China's observance of its nonproliferation commitments, and America's commitment to the self-defense of Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act.

We support President Bush's efforts to narrow differences where they exist but not to allow them to preclude cooperation where there is agreement.

The United States government's policy is that there is one China, as reflected in the three communiqués and the Taiwan Relations Act. America opposes any unilateral decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo. Republicans recognize that America's policy is based on the principle that there must be no use of force by China against Taiwan. We deny the right of Beijing to impose its rule on the free Taiwanese people. All issues regarding Taiwan's future must be resolved peacefully and must be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China violates these principles and attacks Taiwan, then the United States will respond appropriately in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act. America will help Taiwan defend itself.

Republicans applaud President Bush and the Republican Congress for honoring our nation's promises to the people of Taiwan, a longstanding friend of the United States and a genuine democracy. Taiwan deserves America's strong support, including the timely sale of defensive arms to enhance Taiwan's security. In recognition of its growing importance in the global economy, Republicans applaud Taiwan's membership in the World Trade Organization and support its participation in the World Health Organization and other multilateral institutions.

Republican Party platform, 2008

Partnerships across the Asia-Pacific Region
-----

Taiwan
Our policy toward Taiwan, a sound democracy and economic model for mainland China, must continue to be based upon the provisions of the Taiwan Relations Act. We oppose any unilateral steps by either side to alter the status quo in the Taiwan straits on the principle that all issues regarding the island's future must be resolved peacefully, through dialogue, and be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China were to violate these principles, the U.S., in accord with the Taiwan Relations Act, will help Taiwan defend itself. As a loyal friend of America, the democracy of Taiwan has merited our strong support, including the timely sale of defensive arms and full participation in the World Health Organization and other multilateral institutions.

Republican Party platform, 2012

Taiwan
We salute the people of Taiwan, a sound democracy and economic model for mainland China. Our relations must continue to be based upon the provisions of the Taiwan Relations Act. America and Taiwan are united in our shared belief in fair elections, personal liberty, and free enterprise. We oppose any unilateral steps by either side to alter the status quo in the Taiwan Straits on the principle that all issues regarding the island’s future must be resolved peacefully, through dialogue, and be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China were to violate those principles, the U.S., in accord with the Taiwan Relations Act, will help Taiwan defend itself. We praise steps taken by both sides of the Taiwan Strait to reduce tension and strengthen economic ties. As a loyal friend of America, Taiwan has merited our strong support, including free trade agreements status, as well as the timely sale of defensive arms and full participation in the World Health Organization, International Civil Aviation Organization, and other multilateral institutions.

2012: China
We will welcome the emergence of a peaceful and prosperous China, and we will welcome even more the development of a democratic China. Its rulers have discovered that economic freedom leads to national wealth. The next lesson is that political and religious freedom leads to national greatness. The exposure of the Chinese people to our way of life can be the greatest force for change in their country. We should make it easier for the people of China to experience our vibrant democracy and to see for themselves how freedom works. We welcome the increase in trade and education alliances with the U.S. and the opening of Chinese markets to American companies.

The Chinese government has engaged in a number of activities that we condemn: China’s pursuit of advanced military capabilities without any apparent need; suppression of human rights in Tibet, Xinjiang, and other areas; religious persecution; a barbaric one-child policy involving forced abortion; the erosion of democracy in Hong Kong; and its destabilizing claims in the South China Sea. Our serious trade disputes, especially China’s failure to enforce international standards for the protection of intellectual property and copyrights, as well as its manipulation of its currency, call for a firm response from a new Republican Administration.

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

WHO Letter Drive

FAPA Europe is organizing a letter drive on the WHO issue. Details in email below.

++++++++++++++++

Dear Friends:

As you know, Taiwan is actively seeking to join the WHO (World Health Organization), and this May 19th to 24th, the annual World Health Assembly meeting will be held in Geneva....If you have friends or relatives who are also fluent in English, French, German, Greek or whichever European language (such as university students in Taiwan majoring in foreign languages, or friends and relatives living in N. America or Europe), please encourage them to write to their foreign affairs ministers. It is every citizen's responsibility to stand up for his country especially with the difficult situation Taiwan finds itself now, relying on government officials to do all diplomatic missions are just not enough. Please join us by starting your own WHO letter campaign today.

A sample letter:

Dear XX, Minister of Foreign Affairs:
Re: Disease Prevention without Borders

In the coming World Health Assembly (WHA) meeting, Taiwan will again seek World Health Organization (WHO) membership application as well as WHA observer status, such admittance is long overdue and we hope you will support Taiwan's efforts wholeheartedly.

Since the 2005 secret MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) between China and the WHO, Taiwan has received only 16 of 231 public health notifications issued by the WHO. Taiwan was notified of only 40 of more than 1,000 WHO technical meetings and allowed to attend only nine of those. The MOU therefore indeed blocked Taiwan's meaningful participation in the WHO activities instead of its original intention.

Because China has a history of covering up the severity of epidemic spread and diseases within its own borders, if there is any delay in epidemic reporting or statistics misrepresentation, there will be dispute on which side causes the problem. The current WHO's procedures of informing Taiwan all health-related issues under the MOU guidelines are totally unacceptable. For example, last September in which Thailand exported contaminated baby corn, resulting in severe illness in some countries, but Taiwan's public health authorities were not informed by the WHO until much later than other countries. Therefore, Taiwan's representation in the WHO has to be completely independent from China's involvement, not to mention about the fact that China has never governed Taiwan for a single day since its foundation.

In the era of increasing globalization, the exclusion of Taiwan from the WHO poses a large danger for everyone, including citizens of your country. We cannot afford to leave Taiwan out of the loop in combating the threats posed by epidemics. Global responses to infectious diseases need to be speedy and well-coordinated by all nations, as epidemic spread is not confined to national boundaries.

The WHO Constitution enshrines the principle that the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being. If your government is serious about promoting the fundamental rights of all people, then it must support Taiwan's integration into the global health community in a meaningful manner, independent from China's unethical demands, and your health officials should actively supervise the operation of the WHO so that the WHO, with its current Chinese Director General, is carrying out the mission of the WHO, not the political agenda of the Chinese government.

Another WHO campaign letter sample is found here but it's best to change it slightly,

Where to send your e-mails:

Norway
Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Denmark
Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Sweden
http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2085
email to Carl Bildt, via the senior registry clerk

Finland
Alexander Stubb astubb@europarl.eu.int

Ireland
http://foreignaffairs.gov.ie/home/index.aspx?id=8596

UK msu.correspondence@fco.gov.uk
The Rt Hon David Miliband, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

Greece
Ministry of Foreign Affairs

For other countries in EU, please check out the portal by clicking on each flag in the map http://e-uprava.gov.si/e-uprava/en/evropa.euprava, then click on the state's portal

+++++++++++++

I think the sample letter is pretty good, since it connects WHO policy to the secret memorandum of understanding between China and WHO that supposedly provides for Taiwan to participate as "Taiwan, China" but which in reality appears to prevent Taiwan from participating.

[Taiwan]

Two From FAPA

Found a couple of interesting things from FAPA in my mailbox today. First, FAPA passed along its commentary on the recent letter from 14 Senators expressing their displeasure with the way China abuses Taiwan in the WHO.

++++++++++++++++

For Immediate Release August 2, 2008

CONTACT: Iris Ho (202)280-0166; irisho@fapa.org

SENATORS CRITICIZE SECRET CHINA-WHO M.O.U. AND BUSH ADMINISTRATION's LACK OF INITIATIVES IN BRINGING TAIWAN INTO THE WHO In a letter to President Bush dated August 1, 2008, five Senators led by Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) express disappointment about the World Health Assembly's (WHA) decision last May to again exclude Taiwan from participating in the annual weeklong meegmail.com, hju.ting in Geneva and urge President Bush to seek inclusion of the 23 million people in the World Health Organization (WHO).

For the past twenty years, Senator Sherrod Brown has been a leading voice in both Houses of Congress for the inclusion of the 23 million people of Taiwan in the World Health Organization.

The Senators write: "We regret that the Administration was not able to find ways to make Taiwan's voice heard in the World Health Organization (WHO). Taiwan's participation is vital if we are to effectively combat global health threats. We urge you to support and advocate for Taiwan's membership in the WHO."

They continue: "Very little progress has been made since Public Law No. 107-10 mandated the Secretary of State endorse "meaningful participation" for Taiwan in the WHA. We are concerned that the recent report by the State Department to Congress regarding Taiwan's participation in the WHO did not mention any administration initiatives in this regard."

In a thinly disguised jab at the secret Memorandum of Understanding that China concluded with the WHO in 2005 allowing China to determine which information from the WHO reaches Taiwan, if any, the Senators add: "In addition to supporting Taiwan's full membership, the United States must oppose any effort by China to interfere with the exchange of information between the WHO and Taiwan. The effectiveness of the WHO relies on the direct flow of information among health experts. Any efforts to curtail the free exchange of information unnecessarily threatens global health and the safety of every nation."

They conclude: "As global health threats emerge, the public health of our nation increasingly depends on cooperation and communication between every nation. It is in America's best interest to ensure that Taiwan is a full member of the WHO."

FAPA President Bob Yang, PhD states: "We agree with the Senators that the secret PRC-WHO M.O.U. needs to go. This arrangement is not only inconceivable, it is likely unlawful for a multilateral international organization to make bilateral arrangements with one of its members. The bottomline is that the United States and the rest of the world should express its outrage - not only about this M.O.U. arrangement but about China' continued playing of politics with the lives of the people of Taiwan."

2008年8月2日 美參議員抨擊世衛與中國秘密備忘錄，不滿布希政府欠缺協助台灣參與世衛實質行動 參議員布朗與4位同僚於7月31日 聯署致函布希總統，對於今年五月世衛大會再次拒絕台灣參與深表失望。他們並希望布希總統能夠協助台灣兩千三百萬人民被容納在世衛組織內。參議員布朗自十多年前還是眾議院成員時，就帶頭發起美國國會支持台灣參與世衛，是台灣爭取世衛參與最忠實的國際友人，每年在美國國會以引進議案，發表聲明或是致函等方式，十多年來毫不間斷，為台灣爭取世衛權益不餘遺力。 議員們在信裡表示：「我們很遺憾行政部門無法找到適當管道，讓世衛聽到台灣的聲音。如果我們要有效率地抵抗對全球衛生系統的威脅，台灣的參與是非常重要的。我們籲請您支持台灣世衛會員籍。」 「自從您簽署第107-10號法律，明文規定國務卿支持台灣有意義的參與世衛年度大會，此議題並沒有太大的進展。我們尤其擔心最近國務院呈報給國會的報告裡，並沒有提到任何行政部門在這方面的努力。」 由於中國在2005年與世衛秘書處秘密簽署一份備忘錄，允許中國自行單方決定哪些世衛資訊可以傳達台灣，議員們在信裡表達嚴重的關切。「除了支持台灣的完整會員籍外，美國必須反對任何中國意欲干涉世衛與台灣之間的資訊交流。世衛的效率建立在衛生專家們之間意見與資訊的自由交流。任何阻撓資訊自由交流的意圖，將威脅到全球衛生體系與各國的健康安全。」 議員們在信函結尾表示：「當全球健康體系受到威脅時，美國本身的公衛更須逐漸依賴世界各國之間的合作與溝通無阻。也因此，台灣成為世衛完整會員國一員是符合美國的利益之內。」 FAPA會長楊英育表示：「我們和這幾位參議員的看法一致，世衛與中國的秘密備忘錄必須立即中止。這份備忘錄不僅令人難以想像，一個國際組織私下與某一會員國簽署文件可說是違法的，並違背其他組織會員國的權益。最終底線是，美國與國際社會應該針對備忘錄，以及中國持續耍手段，將政治置台灣人民性命之上表達最嚴重的抗議。」


The Honorable George W. Bush
The White House1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NWWashington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: We were again disappointed by the World Health Assembly’s (WHA) recent decision to continue its ban on Taiwan’s participation. We regret that the Administration was not able to find ways to make Taiwan’s voice heard in the World Health Organization (WHO). Taiwan’s participation is vital if we are to effectively combat global health threats. We urge you to support and advocate for Taiwan’s membership in the WHO.Very little progress has been made since Public Law No. 107-10 mandated the Secretary of State endorse “meaningful participation” for Taiwan in the WHA. We are concerned that the recent report by the State Department to Congress regarding Taiwan’s participation in the WHO did not mention any administration initiatives in this regard. Public health threats like Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, Extensively Resistant Tuberculosis, and the H5N1 virus are not constrained by national boundaries. Taiwan’s exclusion from the WHO creates a dangerous gap in the exchange of information among countries and puts global health security at risk. Taiwan’s expertise and leadership in combating these global threats must be fully utilized in the global effort to fight these diseases.We agree with recent statements of former Senator Bob Dole, highlighting that “The ca se for admitting Taiwan into the WHO could not be clearer,” as well as his assertion that that there must be a major diplomatic push to support Taiwan’s candidacy. In addition to supporting Taiwan’s participation, the United States must oppose any effort by China to interfere with the exchange of information between the WHO and Taiwan. The effectiveness of the WHO relies on the direct flow of information among health experts. Any efforts to curtail the free exchange of information unnecessarily threatens global health and the safety of every nation. As global health threats emerge, the public health of our nation increasingly depends on cooperation and communication between every nation. It is in America’s best interest to ensure that Taiwan is a member of the WHO. We look forward to hearing from you on this important issue. Sincerely, Sherrod Brown, Jon Tester, Johnny Isakson, David Vitter, Joseph Lieberman

+++++++++++++

This was followed by a letter from 22 Taiwanese organizations to the IOC...

August 2, 2008

CONTACT: Iris Ho (202)280-0166; irisho@fapa.org

22 TAIWANESE AMERICAN ORGANIZATIONS URGE IOC PRESIDENT TO USE “TAIWAN” DURING BEIJING OLYMPIC GAMES INSTEAD OF “CHINESE, TAIPEI”

In a letter dated July 31 to Mr. Jacques Rogge, the President of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the heads of 22 Taiwanese American organizations urge Mr. Rogge to accord Taiwan during the Beijing held Olympic Games the name it deserves: "Taiwan."
Because of pressure from China, Taiwan has been forced for the past three decades to participate in international sports events under th e English tit le "Chinese Taipei," based on a protocol signed with the IOC. An agreement signed between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait in Hong Kong in 1989 states that all sports teams or organizations representing Taiwan will follow IOC regulations when participating in sports events in China.

The letter was triggered by recent discussions in Beijing about whether the title of the Taiwanese Olympic team should be changed from "Chinese Taipei" to Zhongguo Taibei or "China Taipei. " This would lend further credence to China's irrational and unrealistic claims over Taiwan.

The organizations write: "We call on you to rethink the designation given to the nation of Taiwan by the IOC. We recommend that you adopt the straightforward and realist name "TAIWAN" in place of the outdated and denigrating moniker "Chinese Taipei."

They continue: "Recently China attempted to further degrade Taiwan by publicly calling it "China Taipei." This was in clear violation of the IOC decision of 1979. China's nefarious act flew in the face of its own bilateral agreement with Taiwan of 1989 regarding the correct Chinese language translation of "Chinese Taipei." Instead of being a gracious host of the 2008 summer Olympic Games, China is usurping its position to lay territorial claim over Taiwan."

They conclude: "To ensure that the Olympic motto "Citius, Altius, Fortius" encourages fair athletic competition rather than sinister Chinese maneuver to annex Taiwan, we urge you to accord the island na tion the name it deserves. That name is TAIWAN."

FAPA President Bob Yang, Ph.D. comments: "Chinese Taipei" and "China Taipei" are names concocted by communist China to further bully Taiwan in the international community into accepting that Taiwan is a part of China. It is incontestable reality though that Taiwan is not a part of China. It is therefore high time that the international community open its eyes and face and accept the reality that Taiwan is a sovereign independent country whose name is=2 0"Taiwan" - nothing more, nothing less."


2008年8月2日
台美人呼籲國際奧委會主席於北京奧運上稱呼台灣，而非中華台北


22個台美人社團領袖於今日連署致函國際奧委會主席羅格(Jacques Rogge)，呼籲他在北=E 4奧運典禮上以「台灣」之名稱呼台灣。

台美社團領袖們主要是有鑑於目前台灣國內就中華台北或是中國台北名稱的相關辯論，有感而發並進而發起這項聯署信函。

信中表示：「我們希望您能重新審視奧委會給=E 4台灣的=E 5稱。我們建議您採取直接與符合現實的做法，以=E 5灣之名稱呼台灣，=E 8不是過時與有損國格的中華台北。」

「近來中國一再稱呼台灣為中國台北，這是很明顯的違反國際奧委會1979年的決議。中國醜惡的行為與1989年簽署的雙方協定背道而馳。中國原本應是一個大方的奧運地主國，卻反而企圖藉名稱炒作，侵佔台灣B 8權。」

「為了確保奧運精神能夠鼓勵公平的選手競爭，而不是中國意欲併吞台灣，我們呼籲您給予這個島國她值得的名稱：台灣。」

FAPA會長楊英育表示：「中華台北與中國台北都是共產中國為了恐嚇台灣，脅迫國際社會承認台灣為中國的一部份所衍生出來的名稱。台灣很明顯地不是中國的一部份，國際社會應該認清接受台灣是一個主權獨立的國家的事實。」



July 31, 2008

Mr. Jacques Rogge, President
International Olympic Committee
Chateau de Vidy
Lausanne 1007
Switzerland

Dear Mr. Rogge:

We, the under signed representatives=2 0of Taiwanese-American and allied organizations, call on you to rethink the designation given to the nation of Taiwan by the International Olympic Committee (IOC.) We recommend that you adopt the straightforward and realist name "T AIWAN" in place of the outdated and denigrating moniker "Chinese Taipei."

Much has changed since that fateful decisi on of the IOC in 1979. During the ensuing thirty years, Taiwan has evolved from a land occupied by the Nationalist Chinese to a free and democratic country. In the process, the people of Taiwan have come to view themselves as distinct and separate from the citizens of China. In poll after poll, the vast majority of the island's inhabitants identify themselves as Taiwanese rather than Chinese. Equally important, Taiwan has satisfied all the qualifications of a state according to the Montevideo Convention. The three democratically elected Taiwan presidents-Lee Teng-hui, Chen Shui-bian and Ma Ying-jeou, have all proclaimed that the sovereignty of Taiwan belong to the twenty-three million people of Taiwan. Given these facts, "Chinese Taipei" is hardly a fitting designation for Taiwan in international sports or other activities.

Recently China attempted to further degrade Taiwan by publicly calling it "China Taipei." This was in clear violation of the IOC decision of 1979. China's nefarious act flew in the face of its own bilateral agreement with Taiwan of 1989 regarding the correct Chinese language translation of "Chinese Taipei." Instead of being a gracio us host of=2 0the 2008 summer Olympic Games,
China is usurping its position to lay territorial claim over Taiwan.

To ensure that the Olympic motto "Citius, Altius, Fortius" encourages fair athletic competition ra ther than sinister Chinese maneuver to annex Taiwan, we urge you to accord the island nation the name it deserves. That name is TAIWAN.

Sincere yours,

Fred Baehner, President American Taiwan Society Jack Chen, President Austin Institute for Taiwan Studies Adam Huang, President Chhong-Bi Memorial Fund Kang-Hou Wang, President Dr. Kang-Lu Wang Memorial Foundation Terri Giles, Executive Director Formosa Foundation
Pearl Tang, President Formosan Association for Human Rights Bob I. Yang, President Formosan Association for Public Affairs Mary Helen Cruz, President Friends of Taiwan, Inc. Je-Chin Han, President North America Taiwanese Professors' Association Sue Lee, President North America Taiw anese Women's Association Jung Tsai, President North American Taiwanese Medical Association Ben Pin-Shuo Liu, President Professor Chen Wen-chen Memorial Foundation
Josephine Pan, President Taiwan Elite Alliance David Lai, President Taiwan Hakka Association for Public Affairs in North America Ma-chi Chen, President Taiwanese American Federation of Northern California Ron Shieh, President Taiwanese Association of America Tzuhui Chen, Spokesperson Taiwanese Collegian Fred H. Wang, President Taiwanese Hakka Association of America Peter N.P. Lo, President Taiwanese Hakka Association of the World Susan Chang, President World Federation of Taiwanese Associations C.K. Kuo, Coordinator World Taiwanese Congress James S. Chen, Chairman World United Formosans for Independence-U.S.A.

+++++++++++++

[Taiwan]

Thoughts on WHA Observer Status and the Nanjing Talks

WHA observer status....Taiwan News reports on DPP Chairman Tsai Ing-wen's comments:

Opposition Democratic Progressive Party Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen stated that the invitation issued by the World Health Organization (WHO) to Taiwan under the name of "Chinese Taipei" to attend the annual World Health Assembly meeting in Geneva this May "as an observor" had "abandoned" Taiwan's sovereignty and "lacks substantive meaning."

Speaking with reporters after the weekly meeting of the DPP Central Standing Committee, Tsai said that the letter sent by World Health Organization Director-General Margaret Chan to "Chinese Taipei" Department of Health Minister Yeh Ching-chuan on Tuesday "appears to be a one-time invitation and the basis in WHO regulations for the invitation to attend the WHA as an observer is unclear."

Moreover, Tsai noted that Yeh was only referred as a "doctor" and that Taiwan is to be referred only as "Chinese Taipei," not as Taiwan or the Republic of China. The DPP chairwoman also observed that the letter did not mention the May 2005 secret memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed between the WHO Secretariat and the People's Republic of China which requires all WHO contacts with Taiwan to take place through Beijing's Ministry of Health under a "one China framework."

Tsai stated that if Chan's letter represented an "one time invitation and if the question of sovereignty remained darkly clouded, this invitation will lack substantial meaning."

"Any claim by the Ma government that takes this event as a diplomatic victory due to its policy of diplomatic truce will be a grave exaggeration and extremely inappropriate," said the DPP chairwoman, who added that "we do not yet know what was traded to gain this invitation."

Short version (1) it's only for this year, a one-time invite easily rescinded if a pro-Taiwan government comes to power (and the meeting begins on May 18, two days before the first anniversary of Ma's inauguration... lucky coincidence for the Prez); (2) we're "Chinese Taipei"; (3) obviously secret deals were made -- adamantly denied of course -- what were they?

That's the official negative reaction. Let's look at perhaps some positives. The Taipei Times says:

Participating in the WHA ­meeting as an observer means Taiwan would have no voting rights in the assembly or at the WHO. Observers are granted speaking rights at the WHA meeting, but can only attend the meetings and committee sessions held during the annual two-week assembly.

Yeh said that WHA observer status would ensure Taiwan has direct contact with the WHO in exchanging information to protect public safety and would enable Taiwan to share its expertise in public sanitation and disease prevention with other countries.

A very perspicacious friend of mine noted that this is incredibly important for Taiwan. Being able to network will enable Taiwan to set up exchanges with developing nations that want its medical expertise. In South America some nations have been asking for this for a decade, putting quiet pressure on Beijing to tamp down its irrational and provocative anti-Taiwan policies so that other nations can get the benefits of networking with our world class health professionals. Many of the health workers in these nations have been cultivated through programs erected by MOFA to bring professionals from less developed nations to Taiwan for cooperation, efforts that have paid off in increased profile for Taiwan in the world. WHA observer status means little as far as clout in the world, but could mean much in increased support for The Beautiful Island.

A concession here: Dr. Chan, head of the WHO, invited the "Department of Health", an entity that the PRC has long denied has any existence. So it is progress of sorts. "Chinese Taipei" is no big deal, we participate in many organizations under that moniker. It isn't ideal, but it could have been worse. It would be better if we had a pro-Taiwan government in power, one we could trust not to sell out the island, but that's life....

Let's not forget -- there is strong public support for participation in international organizations. The DPP did much to foster this while in office, some of it frankly manipulative, but some of it in response to the authentic yearning for international recognition alive in the public here. This public support put the KMT into a corner, a corner constructed for it partly by previous pro-Taiwan DPP policies. The DPP may be down, but not all of its successes can be reversed or rendered hollow.

One interesting thing about WHA observer status: Ma is playing it up, as Tsai predicted, as a great triumph of his "diplomatic truce" policy and of course, as evidence of China's "goodwill." The reality is that the announcement, which has been in the works for some time, was probably timed to cover up the fact that the CCP pwned the KMT at the recent cross-strait Nanjing talks. Taiwan News has the call -- every word is chewy good:

The talks began last Saturday with an unseemly embrace by SEF Chairman and KMT vice chairman Chiang Ping-kun of ARATS Chairman Chen Yunlin, but the real atmosphere was actually set by the purposeful "coincidence" of the SEF-ARATS talks, held in Nanjing at Beijing's suggestion, of massive celebrations marking the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the former Republic of China capital by the Chinese Communist Party's People's Liberation Army on April 22, 1949.

Although downplayed by pro-KMT media, this transparent political humiliation was followed by a diplomatically cordial drubbing by the Beijing side.

For example, ARATS turned down various requests by the SEF side, such as Taipei's plea to increase the flights for Taiwan airlines in "golden routes" such as between Taipei and Shanghai and instead graciously expanded flights between Taipei and "hot spots" like Nanchang and Hefei instead and added northward routes that passed only through PRC air control zones to emphasize the "domestic" character of cross-strait air routes.

Moreover, in response to the KMT government's urgency to initiate talks on a cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA), the Beijing side excluded the ECFA from discussion for the fourth Chiang-Chen "negotiations," evidently pending the offer of further concessions by the Taipei side.

Last but not least, the PRC side showed that it treated the SEF-ARATS talks as "normal negotiations" by leaking a draft but unsigned set of agreements to the official Xinhua News Agency and thus forcing the Taiwan negotiators to sign Beijing's version or threaten not to sign the agreements, a risk that the KMT side lacked the political courage to take.

As noted in a previous editorial, the underlying strategy of the CCP toward the KMT is reminiscent of the declaration made by the late Soviet Union dictator Joseph Stalin on April 5, 1927 in the midst of the Chinese "national revolution" that Chiang Kai-shek and the KMT "have to be utilized to the end, squeezed out like a lemon, and then flung away."

The other day Taiwan News similarly noted:

For example, the touted "breakthrough" agreements that opened direct cross-strait commercial marine and air links both denigrated Taiwan's status by treating such routes as "domestic" through the exclusion of foreign carriers and thus also harmed Taiwan commercial interests by excluding the vast majority of Taiwan-owned ships which fly foreign flags of convenience and by refusing to extend "fifth freedom" or onward passage rights for even Taiwan airlines.

....

For example, the failure to include onward flight rights in the new pact will reduce Taiwan into a "commercial air dependency" of the PRC, whose airports will gain control over the lion's share of lucrative "hub" onward connections. Given the widespread claim that Taiwan is rich in capital but short on "investment opportunities" (at least for myopic Taiwan investors), the influx of PRC state-owned companies, with the assistance of local proxies, will be able to use the maximum of 30 percent ownership to secure effective managerial control over Taiwan companies and their technology or knowhow in most economic fields, including telecommunications and news media, snare public works contracts and channels for patronage, and, with investments in hotels and travel companies, secure control over the bulk of renminbi spent in Taiwan by Chinese tourists.

The imminent financial services memorandum of understanding (MOU), which even KMT lawmakers have warned will result in "Money Out" of Taiwan, will offer the PRC's giant state banks channels to control over even more Taiwan capital and access to up-to-date inside financial information on Taiwan companies and any citizen who has a credit or finance card, access which will undoubtedly be utilized for political as well as commercial purposes.

Moreover, the obvious "quid pro quo" that Beijing will overtly or covertly demand for an agreement to "fight cross-strait crime" and any grudging assistance in sending "economic criminals" back to Taiwan will be "reciprocal" assistance in securing the "return," expulsion from Taiwan or control of political dissidents, perhaps painted as "terrorists," such as advocates of Tibetan independence or Chinese democracy.

Last but not least, the insistence by Ma and the KMT government that these agreements have nothing to do with "politics" or Taiwan's sovereignty means that no "firewalls" will be set in place to prevent PRC interests from expanding political influence in Taiwan in the pattern of the China Resources Group and the Xinhua News Agency in Hong Kong.

Far from showing the strength of Ma's diplomacy, the recent WHA and Nanjing talks displayed the utter dependency of the KMT on the CCP. The agreements give China control over key cross-strait markets, ratified by the KMT because it desperately needs something, anything, to show its cross-strait policies are a success. Foreigners who trumpeted the advent of the KMT should take note at their exclusion -- these markets belong neither to them nor to Taiwan, but solely to China. Asian nations may give lip service to the free market religion, but at heart they are atheists. When state-backed Chinese firms come calling for Taiwan companies -- is a telecom deal imminent? -- foreign firms will be out in the cold too. But at least they will be able to fly conveniently from the Taiwan SAR directly to China on their way out of here.....

Much praise to Taiwan News for its great run of editorials lately. You can almost measure the political status of the island by the quality of Taiwan New's editorials -- as the threat to Taiwan rises, so does the asskicking quotient of their work. Good work, guys.

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Connecting the Dots -- UPDATED --

Three pieces of news coming together this week. First, breaking today, the government said China had agreed to permit Taiwan to have observer status at the World Health Assembly (WHA). From KNN:

Yeh Ching-chuan, Minister of the Department of Health (DOH) under the Executive Yuan, visited Legislative Yuan Speaker Wang Jin-pyng this morning and confirmed that he had received a formal invitation from Margaret Chan, Director-General of World Health Organization, to lead a delegation, under the designation of Chinese Taipei, to participate as an observer in the 62nd World Health Assembly, scheduled to be held on May 18.

Minister Yeh ....pointed out four significant implications of this invitation. They are:

1. A breakthrough of the formulation that was used in the 2005 MOU model, namely, “Taiwan, China.”
2. The WHO Secretariat contacted the DOH directly.
3. The designation of “Chinese Taipei” is used.
4. The level of representation is elevated to that of minister.

We can expect a flood of articles with the phrase "further sign of warming ties" etc as well as fawning pieces from Ma/KMT supporters in the western policy community. There is nothing really important about Taiwan being able to observe an assembly, and this development has been in the cards for months. We'll come back to this...

Two other developments are of interest this week. First, Taiwan News came out with one of its best editorials ever, on the odious new draft Assembly and Parade Law:

The Cabinet's draft bill will drop the current requirement for the application of a parade permit, but will substitute a compulsory and highly restrictive advance notification system and is full of other features that will threaten to curtail the actual possibilities of citizens or civic organizations to exercise their right of assembly and protest.

Among the more unreasonable statutes include the imposition of an excessive 300 meter buffer zone between protestors and "restricted sites" such as the Office of the President, the Executive Yuan and all embassies or foreign representative offices.

Moreover, Article 9 may impose a prohibitive social cost on march organizers by requiring agreement in writing from "private locations" along a proposed route march must be submitted with the five-day advance march notification.

In addition, Article 10 requires that the "responsible person" reporting a planned rally cannot be less than 20 years of age, must have ROC citizenship, cannot have had previous convictions or be under probation or a police record or under guidance or counseling for juvenile offense or under guardianship.

Under this restriction, foreign workers would be effectively banned from protesting mistreatment or discrimination by employers, ex-convicts would be prohibited from holding a rally to call for changes in unfair rulings and persons under "guardianship" for physical or mental handicaps would be unable to protest the failure of public facilities or government policies to address their problems.

But these problems pale in light of Article 11, which grants the "responsible" law enforcement authorities the power at will to ban, restrict or change the course, location or time of any "reported" assembly or protest if police deem that the event will "immediately affect national security, social order or the public interest" or will immediately threaten lives, health or liberty or cause damage to property or if there is an overlap between different parades.

While an immediate threat to lives and health would justify police action, the vague language of "harm to national security, social order or the public interest" gives immense scope for abuse if law enforcement agencies or their political masters determine that a protest "violates national security or the public interest" as determined by the ruling party.

Moreover, the new "liberalized" draft bill contains a powerful weapon to stifle small or large protests in Article 26, which would allow the government to impose cumulative fines between NT$30,000-NT$150,000 on the "responsible persons" for marches which the police decide to ban if participants do not comply and to increase the fine repeatedly until the orders are obeyed.

The provision of accumulating massive fines if a rally does not obey the commands of police to disperse will undoubtedly intimidate many small groups from holding any assemblies at all and threatens to bankrupt any organization which dares to launch a major protest action.

It should be obvious that this new clause is directly aimed at the DPP, the Taiwan Solidarity Union and other "Taiwan-centric" organizations which could challenge the KMT government's tilt toward the authoritarian People's Republic of China with massive protests, such as the action to "safeguard jobs and sovereignty" on May 17.

Even a cursory review shows that these revisions are not aimed at facilitating but intend to trample on the right of assembly which is granted to all citizens under the ROC Constitution and to all people under the International Covenant on Civic and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights approved by the KMT-controlled Legislative Yuan March 31 and promulgated by Ma last Wednesday.

Indeed, the unseemly haste of KMT legislators to secure the passage of this dangerous bill naturally gives to suspicions that the KMT intends to use these tools actively to ride roughshod over any protests to its pro-China policies and intimidate into silence any public voices angry over its incompetence.

The DPP's last weapon against the annexation of the island and the evisceration of its economic and social strength is the street demonstration. The new law would be a great weapon against it. The really great thing is the in-your-face timing that is classic: the new law comes after the Wild Strawberry protests against the original law, which as it turns out was less restrictive, and it comes after Ma made the legislature pass the human rights covenants discussed above. This is the same mentality at work that appoints two new bishops for the PRC state Catholic Church in the midst of negotiations with the Vatican, or places a nuclear waste dump on a pristine tropical island while telling the locals they were getting a fish cannery.

The third thing that has happened recently, which I think is also interesting, is that the Treaty of Taipei is being revived (Wiki, text of treaty) by President Ma:

President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said yesterday that the 1952 Treaty of Taipei affirmed the transfer of Taiwan’s sovereignty from Japan to the Republic of China (ROC). Ma’s statement deviated from his previous claim that it was the 1943 Cairo Declaration that gave the ROC its claim to Taiwan.

“While the 1952 treaty does not specify the legal successor government [of Taiwan], it was clear between the lines,” he said. “Japan would not have signed the accord with the ROC if it did not intend to concede the territories to the ROC.”

Ma said the 1952 pact had three meanings: It not only affirmed the “de jure termination of war between Japan and the ROC” after Tokyo’s surrender in 1945, but reasserted the “de jure transfer of Taiwan’s sovereignty to the ROC” as well as “restoring friendly and normal relations with Japan.”

Ma made the remarks at an unveiling ceremony at the Taipei Guest House of a bronze sculpture depicting representatives of Japan and the ROC signing the treaty on April 28, 1952. The statues are part of an exhibition marking the 57th anniversary of the treaty.

A couple of weeks back a local pro-KMT scholar came out with the claim that she had "discovered" that the Treaty of Taipei recognized ROC sovereignty over Taiwan (see article referenced above), which it certainly does not. It clearly defers to the San Francisco Peace Treaty and like it, refuses to name a recipient of the sovereignty over Taiwan.

The interesting thing is, why now? The 57th anniversary of anything is not important. On one side, the KMT government drafts laws attacking the freedom of the public to assemble, clearly aimed at the pro-Taiwan opposition. On the other, it pushes a treaty that it claims gives the ROC legal authority over Taiwan, while in yet another direction, it clearly waited for China to grant Taiwan WHA observer status, a strong signal that the KMT government considers that Taiwan is subordinate to the PRC.

The pixels are coming into focus: a legal basis of the upcoming "treaty of peace" between the KMT and the CCP will be the Treaty of Taipei, gently revived here for future use. I think we'll be seeing some kind of shared sovereignty position here with the Treaty of Taipei as a pillar or justification -- note that by changing the claim for ROC jurisdiction over Taiwan from Cairo to the Treaty of Taipei, Ma avoids getting the US tangled up in the legalities -- just in time for the 2011 100th anniversary of the ROC, a stealth agreement that will attempt to avoid sparking voter recognition that the islanders have been sold out -- because there are elections in 2012. Much remains to be filled in, but the speed of events is breathtaking. And with democratic oversight of events carefully checked by KMT control of the legislature and by constant claims that no such oversight is necessary.....

UPDATE: FAPA attempts in this press release to inject some sanity into the Hallelujah Chorus of Benevolent China and Provocative Taiwan Having Warming Ties:

Washington DC. The KMT administration of President Ma Ying-jeou is playing politics with the health of the people of Taiwan. This is the position of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) in reaction to the announcement on April 29th by Mr. Ma that Taiwan has been invited, as “Chinese Taipei,” to attend the upcoming annual meeting of the World Health Assembly, the WHO governing body in Geneva.

FAPA President Prof. Bob Yang stated in a reaction that “Taiwan’s international status has taken another step backward.” The head of the Taiwanese-American grassroots organization headquartered in Washington DC added: “We have been working for Taiwan’s membership in the World Health Organization for more than a decade. It is the right of Taiwan as a free and democratic country to have truly meaningful participation in this important international health organization. That can only be done if Taiwan is a full and equal member.” “Just attending the WHA-and under the subservient moniker “Chinese Taipei,” doesn’t protect the health of the people of Taiwan”, he said, adding: “For that, Taiwanese doctors need to have unfettered access specialists’ meetings and information exchange.”

He explained that the conditions under which Ma’s government is now accepting “observership” are demeaning to the Taiwanese and undermine Taiwan’s sovereignty. In particular the use of the idiosyncratic name “Chinese Taipei” is an outrage, he said. “Everyone, including the US, calls Taiwan Taiwan”, he added: “why can’t Taiwan do the same?”

Dr. Yang also said he is concerned about any under-the-table deals made by the Ma Administration with China on the matter, given the precedent of the nauseating MOU forced on WHO by China in 2005. He said that the decision-making process of the Ma Administration has been “clear as mud.” He urged the legislature and the public in Taiwan to demand full transparency, and disclosure of any deals made with China on the issue. “Only then will we be able to say that Taiwanese sovereignty and interests have not been sold out”, he said.

Dr. Yang concluded that it would be a dangerous precedent if Taiwan’s participation in international organizations is at the whim of Beijing. “Why are we letting a repressive and authoritarian regime set the conditions under which a free and democratic nation participates in the international community?” he asked. “Isn’t this a flagrant violation of the basic UN principles which we should adhere to?”

He added that the Taiwanese-American community would continue to work with the Obama Administration and Congress to protect Taiwan’s safety and security, and help Taiwan become a full and equal member of the international community.

No breakthrough here, folks, just the same pattern of the KMT subordinating Taiwan to China and its desire to annex the island that we have seen since Ma took power. Good-bye, free and independent Taiwan: we hardly knew ya.

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Events -- Willy Lam Talk (11th), Meet up (14th)

(1) Willy Lam talk

中研院社會所**演講公告
*
講　題： A Closer Look at China's Elite Politics and Foreign Power Projection 【In English】

主講人：Willy Lam (林和立) 教授 (日本教養國際大學 Akita International University, Japan)

主持人：蕭新煌 所長 (中央研究院社會學研究所)

時　間：99年5月11日（星期二）下午2時30分 - 下午4時30分

地　點：中研院人文館南棟社會所802會議室
*～～～～～～～～～～～*
*演講簡介：

*The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has started preparations for transition of power from the the Fourth to the Fifth Generation, which will take place at the 18^th Party Congress of 2012. Will the younger corps of leaders be able to tackle growing contradictions within the socio-political fabric – and uphold the CCP’s “perennial ruling-party status” – in the absence of genuine reforms? Have corruption and bureaucratic malaise precipitated a crisis of governance? Can the Fifth- and Sixth-Generation leadership inject new ideas to arrest the decline in the party’s legitimacy and efficacy? For how long can the party rely on its control and security apparatus to bolster its somewhat tattered mandate of heaven? Or is it just that the party-state apparatus has become too big to fail?

Partly due to the fact that nationalism has become the most effective agent of cohesiveness in China, the CCP leadership has been projecting both hard and soft power to strengthen the country’s worldwide clout. What are the traits of China’s quasi-superpower diplomacy? Are the People’s Liberation Army generals getting more say over foreign and security policies? Will the PRC’s growing economic and military prowess feed the “China threat” theory? Will the increasingly adverse competition with the United States in areas including resources, trade – and outer space – affect regional and world stability? These and other questions will be discussed at the lecture and Q&A session.

*講者簡介：
* *
*With more than 30 years of experience in writing and researching about China, Willy LAM 林和立is a recognized authority on areas including the Chinese Communist Party, elite politics, foreign policy, the People’s Liberation Army, as well as the country’s economic and political reform. Dr Lam has worked in senior editorial positions in international media including Asiaweek newsmagazine, /South China Morning Post/, and the Asia-Pacific Headquarters of CNN.

Since early 2005, Dr Lam has been a Professor of China Studies at Akita International University, Japan (www.aiu.ac.jp ). He is also an Adjunct Professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (History Department, Center for East Asian Studies, and Asia-Pacific Research Institute); and a Senior Fellow at Jamestown Foundation (www.jamestown.org ), a leading foreign-policy think tank in Washington D.C. *

*Dr Lam’s views on China are frequently sought by global media including CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, ABC, AFP, Bloomberg, Voice of America, and other major publications and electronic media. He holds degrees from the University of Hong Kong (BA); University of Minnesota (MA); and Wuhan University (PhD in political economy). Dr Lam has published six books on China, including /Chinese Politics in the Hu Jintao Era /(M.E. Sharpe, 2006). **

*～～～～～～～～～～～*
*中研院社會所敬邀*

--
李晏榛 Yen-chen Lee
中央研究院社會學研究所 學術合作秘書
Secretary for Academic Cooperation, Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica
地址：11528台北市南港區研究院路二段128號
Address: 128, Sec. 2, Academia Rd, Taipei, TAIWAN
TEL: (02)2652-5078
FAX: (02)2652-5070
Email:yenchen@gate.sinica.edu.tw
http://www.ios.sinica.edu.tw

(2) Meet up -- Jerome sends around advance notice of the very interesting guest

Second, advance notice about the next Breakfast Club meeting. It will be on Saturday May 14th, 10 am and the topic will be "Who needs WHO? an informal review of what WHO (World Health Organization) is and does."

The speaker will be Dr. Ferdinand Siem Tjam a Medical Doctor from Suriname with a Masters of Public Health Degree in Planning, Organization and Management of Mental Health Services from the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, in Baltimore, Maryland.

From 1983 until retiring in 2003, he was a staff member of the World Health Organization Headquarters in Geneva. His main occupation was studying, investigating reporting and advising on the development of health systems and services, with special emphasis on the evolution of hospital services as part of Health Systems Development and Public Health Administration, their management, related hospital technologies, and Quality Assurance and Accreditation of Health Services Delivery.

In parallel he studied wound ballistics, aviation, political and military history, and small arms systems. He holds an Airline Transport Licence and is a CFII (Certified flight Instructor Instruments) and served as a forensic expert to the courts in Suriname. During his career he has periodically taught medicine and traumatology (U. of Suriname) firearms ballistics (Suriname Police Inspectors Academy) private and commercial and jungle flying (Suriname), Public Health (Antwerp, Zagreb, Leeds, Paramaribo).

Jerome will confirm venue etc. later this coming week; this is just to give you some advance notice to help you plan.

Since Taiwan's membership would be both good for the World as well as for Taiwan, this should be an interesting presentation.

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan Press Freedom Committee on WHO Exclusion

A solarized school. Wish they'd do that to all public buildings...

In mid-May the UN excluded Taiwanese journalists from attending the meeting of the World Health Assembly, which overseas the WHO (FocusTaiwan). Many international organizations and individuals spoke out in support of Taiwan. This week the Press Freedom Committee of the  Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan sent around this statement of support:

Press Freedom Committee Statement on Taiwanese Journalists, WHO

The Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan's Press Freedom Committee objects to the World Health Organization's decision to deny Taiwanese Journalists press accreditation to cover the World Health Assembly, which started May 21.

Although Taiwan is not a member state of the WHO, its journalists had been allowed to attend and report on the annual meeting prior to 2017. Denial of their accreditation is an infringement on press freedom. Accurate health reporting is critical to a safe and informed citizenry and health crises do not stop at political borders. We therefore call on the WHO to resume issuing press credentials to Taiwanese journalists because no journalist should be barred from reporting solely because of their nationality.

Freedom of Press Committee

One of many insults from China....
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Psalmanazar at DKos, WHO Entry

The first Taiwanese in Europe, Psalmanazar, blogs at DailyKos on the problem of press freedom and the UN on World Press Freedom Day:

The practice of denying Taiwan’s professional journalists press accreditation to the World Health Assembly began in 2004, when the United Nation’s Geneva Office took over responsibility for handling the media for the event. It is ironic that before 2004 the WHO saw absolutely no problem in handing out press passes to Taiwan’s professional journalists to cover the WHA meeting while it continued to deny their country of origin the right to similarly observe that event.

But in May 2004 the UN’s Geneva office suddenly decreed that only journalists who could produce a passport from a country recognized by the UN and another form of photo ID would receive accreditation, a decision that effectively barred the majority of Taiwanese journalists because the UN doesn’t recognize Taiwan nor the rights of its 23 million citizens. That year only two Taiwanese journalists were given press credentials, and this was only because they happened to possess American and British passports. When asked about the sudden reversal in policy, chief of the Geneva office’s press and external relations section said that the UN doesn’t recognize Taiwan as a state and that the reporters’ Taiwan passports were merely “local passports”.

The UN’s decision to deny Taiwanese journalists accreditation raises two troubling questions. The first deals with Taiwan’s ability and right to receive timely information pertaining to the health of its citizens. Once again we can turn to the WHO’s own charter to see that keeping Taiwan out of the information loop is against the spirit, if not the letter of the WHO’s stated commitment to health. The constitution’s preface states that “[i]nformed opinion and active cooperation on the part of the public are of the utmost importance in the improvement of the health of the people.” As I discussed in my last entry, the Taiwan government’s ability to communicate and share data with the WHO continues to be degraded by the month. As bad as this is, the argument could be made that these communications could also be made via other channels like the media. The Geneva office’s decision to deny Taiwan’s reporters access to the WHA and its policy-planning sessions closes that remaining channel, leaving Taiwan dependent on second- or third-hand information about these meetings and unable to form the very “informed opinions” on public health that the WHO hopes to provide the world’s people.

The diary coincides with a renewed drive by Taiwan's foreign ministry to enter the WHO. The GIO unveiled a new ad yesterday:

The Government Information Office (GIO) yesterday unveiled a new advertisement to promote the nation's bid to participate in the WHO.

On the advertisement, WHO is written as "WHC," with the "C" representing an incomplete "O" to deliver the message that as Taiwan is not yet a member, the organization is not complete.

"As you can see, on the advertisement, WHO is written as `WHC' because Taiwan is not in the organization so the `O' is not complete," GIO deputy minister William Yih (易榮宗) said.

The WHO Secretariat rejected Taiwan's latest bid to participate in the organization on April 25 after President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) sent a letter on April 11 to WHO Director-General Margaret Chan (陳馮富珍) asking that the country be allowed to join the health body.

There was also a small demonstration in front of the American Institute in Taiwan, hoping to attract US support for the island's WHO bid.

[Taiwan] [China] [US] [WHO] [UN]

Sucide and the Media: a filmmaker and an NGO join hands

A new effort is being made to attack Taiwan's appalling suicide rate, and to stop the media from sensationalizing suicide for its political goals. Suicide rates here are just under twice those in the US....

Official figures showed that suicide has been one of the top ten causes of death for the last eight years, with 4,282 people--or 18.8 per 100,000 people--killing themselves last year.

The effort is aimed at Taiwan's media....

Taiwanese media should avoid sensationalism and should be more sympathetic to victims when reporting on suicide incidents, a documentary director said at a press conference called by a Taiwanese media watchdog Sept. 7.

Filmmaker Chung Mong-hong won the best documentary award at this year's Taipei Film Festival for his film "Doctor," which tells the story of a Taiwanese doctor working in Iowa and later Miami in the United States, who had to deal with the loss of his own son to suicide and then that of a young patient to cancer.

At the press conference, Chung criticized what he called the "bloodthirsty" coverage of suicide on Taiwan's television stations, which overlooked the trauma experienced by those surviving the death of a loved one. Citing examples from his film, Chung said he had shown media reports from the Iowan town that allowed the bereaved to speak for themselves.

The Broadcasting Development Fund, a nonprofit media watch organization, called the press conference to release the results of its survey of media reports of suicide cases in Taiwan and to mark World Suicide Prevention Day on Sept. 10, a date designated by the World Health Organization for promotion of global and regional efforts focusing on the worldwide suicide problem.

Last month, the BDF released its analysis of negative coverage of suicides; this time the focus was on the rare cases of positive reporting. Both surveys looked at coverage by major TV channels and newspapers in Taiwan and were commissioned by the Department of Health.

The media frequently uses suicide as a way to attack the government...

Citing positive in-depth reports on one TV channel and discussions regarding increased suicides among young people by two newspapers, BDF CEO Connie Lin said that these few examples stood out. In contrast, she described local TV networks that stigmatized suicides for political purposes as "lacking conscience."

Lin pointed out that using reports of suicides as a means to criticize the government and politicians further impinged on relatives' bereavement. She urged local media to undertake a thorough soul-searching in line with suggestions promoted for World Suicide Prevention Day, whose slogan this year was "with understanding, new hope."

Expressing his anger, Chung argued that people commit suicides for various complex reasons and said that merely being a "credit card slave" was not automatically one of them. Journalists, he said, should deal with suicide cases in a most careful and delicate way.

What are the criteria of a proper suicide report?

Lu Wan-ping of the BDF explained in a telephone interview that the foundation used criteria taken from the WHO publication "Preventing Suicide: a resource for media professionals" to decide whether a suicide report was positive. These included whether a report highlighted alternatives to suicide, provided information on helplines and community resources, worked with health authorities to present facts and publicized risk indicators and warning signs.

Lu said that, while guidelines were available, it was up to individual reporters whether to follow them and to regulate themselves. These guidelines were published by Taiwan Suicide Prevention Center, which was established in December 2005 under the Department of Health to integrate suicide prevention resources and address the rising suicide mortality rate in Taiwan.

Suicide sucks. Let's hope efforts like this enjoy success.

[Taiwan]

Video of WHA officials rejecting a Taiwanese passport

Here the WHA refuses to accept a Taiwan passport. A disgusting, shameful kowtow to Beijing by individuals from democratic countries. Please spread this video far and wide.

Ma claimed that at the WHA Taiwan and China were equal yesterday:

President Ma Ying-jeou yesterday said that the health ministers from Taiwan and China are on equal footing at the World Health Assembly (WHA).

Ma's comment came as a clarification after a leaked World Health Organization (WHO) document shows that Taiwan is listed as a province of China.

A letter sent out by WHO Secretary-General Margaret Chan last September to WHO members referred to Taiwan as “Taiwan Province of China,” according to a report appearing in a local Chinese-language newspaper.

In response, President Ma explained that Taiwan's minister of health will receive equal treatment as his Chinese counterpart at the WHA meeting, which will be held in Geneva, Switzerland on May 16-25.

Obviously not. ADDED: Don't miss this good analysis of the WHO flap in the Taipei Times.

UPDATE: The offending memo from here. It is an internal document that helps members describe how to refer to the nations of the world. Since it says UN policy is to annex Taiwan to China, this obviously begs the question of the existence of similar documents issued from places above the WHO's head:

_______________________ 
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Non-support is Support for Beijing

It's WHO time again...and AFP reports on Taiwan's frustration with "friendly" nations...

Taiwan said it expected the United States to lead a push for observer status for the island at the World Health Organization (WHO) despite China's persistent opposition.

Joseph Wu, Taiwan's de facto envoy in Washington, said he expected "very clear support" from the United States, Japan and Canada for Taiwan's observer status with European nations, Australia and New Zealand pushing for "meaningful participation" in the organization.

But none of the countries support Taiwan's membership in WHO, he told reporters ahead of the May 19-24 annual meeting of the World Health Assembly, the highest decision-making body of the WHO, whose 192 member countries meet once a year to agree on policies and appoint a director-general.

In recent years Australia has been trying to put an end to Taiwan's dollar diplomacy, claiming it is corrupting governments in the region. This may well be true. But by putting pressure on Taiwan, the Aussies essentially cede the region to Beijing, since Beijing isn't going to stop. Apparently Aussie foreign policy analysts believe it is better to have Beijing's influence in their backyard than Taiwan's. Be careful what you wish for.....

But addressing "chequebook diplomacy" is treating the symptom. Taiwan engages in dollar diplomacy because it has no other choice if it wants some kind of recognition in the world. If Australia was really interested in putting an end to Taiwan's behavior in the South Seas, it could take positive steps to support Taiwan into the WHO -- treating the cause, not the symptom. Ditto for the US. If more nations gave Taiwan their support in reasonable causes like the WHO, Taiwan would have less incentive to engage in cowboy diplomacy.

Note that the WHO meeting is May 19-24. The new President, Ma Ying-jeou, is sworn in on the 20th. Will China display benevolence? Or will they remind Ma who is really in the saddle?

UPDATE: No sooner do I get this one out, then the student paper at St. Olaf's has a piece arguing for greater US support for our democracy and for Taiwan's participation in international organizations.

UPDATE II: As several people reminded me, Chen applied under the name "Taiwan" which means that China and Ma have a ready-made excuse -- can't let "Taiwan" in. So we'll have to wait until next year, again...

[Taiwan]

Nelson Report on Chen's WHO Letter

I was planning on getting some work done tonight, but evidently the flow of news isn't going to permit that....here are some excerpts from the latest Nelson Report, the Washington Insider report widely read around the globe...a top flight essay.

++++++++++++++++

TAIWAN...Washington types working on this morning's bowl of porridge turned to the Post's editorial page, to be greeted by an Op Ed from Taiwan President Chen Shuibian.

In it, he demanded full membership in the World Health Organization in careful, but sharp phrases including this: Taiwan, formally known as the Republic of China, is indisputably a sovereign state, satisfying all of the criteria... including a permanent population, a defined territory, a functional government and the capacity to conduct relations with other states. It also has its own internationally traded currency and issues its own passport, honored by virtually all other nations.

Some Loyal Readers confess to turning pale, thinking that, as he has in the past, Chen had taken a deliberate step over the "status quo" line in ways which put that status quo at risk, by possibly provoking Beijing into some form of retaliation.

In fact, US experts agree that Chen's Op Ed reflects the careful lawyer he can be, when he wants to be...and here's the key: he doesn't use the I-word ...the real red flag to Beijing... independence .

So what's the problem? Well...there's an election on Taiwan going on now, and how to relate to the PRC has been bitterly debated between the old, mainland-founded and focused KMT, and the home-grown, independence minded DPP of President Chen, throughout the Bush Administration. As we are experiencing now, in the US, a presidential election has the tendency to heighten tensions, heighten differences, and to produce increasingly strident rhetoric designed to embarrass or defeat the opposition.
......[discussion of discourse and the I-word deleted].......

Step back a bit and you can see just the latest example of an inherently neurotic, very risky dynamic at work, one which has flared-up repeatedly during the nearly 8 years of the Chen Administration, but which really goes back to the Cold War, and the Nixon Administration.

Unfortunately, Taiwan and the WHO has become a live grenade in a rhetorical contest for international participation and influence which has been tossed back and forth between Washington and Beijing, and Taipei and Beijing, long before the US started to demand WHO observer status for Taiwan a decade ago...during the Clinton Administration, let the record reflect.

As elected officials in Taipei know all too well, they cannot gain official membership in any UN organization, including the WHO, since full membership requires independent sovereign state status....something the US agreed to abandon on Taiwan's behalf in 1972...the Republican administration of Mr. Nixon, and which was officially consumated by Democrat Jimmy Carter, with Deng Xiaoping, in 1979-80.

Since that time, a neurotic dynamic has been at work where friends of Taiwan here join with shifting political factions on Taiwan to seek official looking, or official sounding support from the US. Sometimes this takes the very solid form of arms sales, seen by both the Clinton and Bush Administration's as a legitimate response to potentially status-quo threatening actions by China; sometimes it  the seemingly trivial, but highly symbolic granting of transit visas for senior Taiwanese, especially the President, which offer the prospect of high-profile visits in the US.

As President Chen argues today, and US officials agree, there is very solid reason to be concerned about China's missile build-up along the Taiwan Strait, and China's continued reluctance to engage in internationally recognized norms of transparency on military and strategic questions. So while there have been times when US arms sales to Taiwan were not entirely the result of PRC actions (the first President Bush's F-16 sales come to mind) more often, US arms packages reflect a solid assessment of the evolving strategic realities.

We use the adjective "neurotic" advisedly, for two reasons: first, it is pretty easy to see why any Taiwanese political figure would feel insecure , and would be tempted to push for symbolic expressions of continued love and support from the US Government, and you can certainly see why that emotional need would be fed by Chinese actions designed to counter any such expressions by the US...and you can see how there is a constant chicken and egg dynamic at work;

Second, the dynamic is neurotic in ways we often see from the National Rifle Association, or the ACLU, or AIPAC, highly organized lobbies which habitually block otherwise reasonable positions for fear of setting a precedent for something they may not want, somewhere down the line. Granting Taiwan the US's officially approved term of meaningful participation in the WHO not only seems reasonable, to any outsider, it IS reasonable...except that Beijing also knows that, because of the neurosis factor, Taiwan can be counted on to take such an event as a gain to be exploited, even though that risks making other Taiwanese goals even less attainable.

For example, Chen's air of wounded innocence is somewhat compromised by his actions just a couple of weeks ago, when he sent a secret letter to the WHO demanding full membership...and didn't let the Bush Administration know about it. Clear it with the American Institute on Taiwan, and/or the State Department, if you want to be frank about it.[MT: WHAT? Doesn't the President ever learn? Somebody needs to explain the facts of life to that man!]

Since it's the US which has been trying to persuade Beijing to stop blackmailing the WHO into blackballing Taiwan for the past 10 years...an effort which has not been diminished under the Bush Administration...you can perhaps understand why the Bush folks were displeased with Chen's maneuver, while basically sympathetic to the expression of frustration and hope in today's Op Ed.

Another factor which is starting to surface, and which should be of concern to Beijing...there is no question that China blocking the US demand for Taiwan's meaningful participation is increasingly seen as not just nasty, not just stupid, but, increasingly, as symptomatic of China being really, really dangerous to world health.

The central government's mis-handling of the SARS threat has been somewhat improved in recent years, but given the recent scandal of poisonous pet food, followed by the truly terrifying prospect of Chinese export of deadly generic medicines for human consumption...you don't have to be an advocate of international space for Taiwan to be really, really worried about the whole PRC posture on world health issues.

So China's continued veto of any kind of Taiwan participation in the WHO suddenly takes on far more weight than previously...one which Beijing, to date, seems incapable of grasping as a responsible stakeholder .

Hummm....a longer essay than we intended. In any event, a continual problem, one which is no going to get any better for the forseeable future.

[Taiwan] [DPP] [media] [2008 Presidential Election] [China] [WHO] [Chen Shui-bian] [US]

Taidu Beauties Make Minister Yeh Cry

Minister Yeh was in Geneva to observe the World Health Assembly and lo and behold, a couple of fierce Taiwan independence babes assailed him. He convened an instant press conference, where he sniffled and whimpered. I'm with ya man, totally hot Taiwan girls have the same effect on me.

You can watch the event on video. I think I'll turn this one over to the pro-KMT China Post to watch The Message at work:

A dozen co-eds, who claim they are studying in European universities, badgered the MOH chief at the Intercontinental Hotel party about the title with which he is participating in the Geneva meeting of the decision-making body of the World Health Organization.

When they confirmed Yeh was representing “Chinese Taipei,” the bevy of girls accused him of selling out Taiwan. In particular, they charged him with attending the meeting as representative from “Taiwan, province of China,” the official U.N. designation of the island state.

Chinese Taipei is taking part in the meeting as an observer for the first time.

“A traitor,” one of the girls shouted.

That drew the indignant Yeh's cry-out. “Shame on you, all,” he blurted.

By trying to insult him, Yeh said, “These self-styled college students were not only insulting themselves, but all the people of Taiwan.”

After the protesting students had been led away, Yeh called a crash press conference, where he said nobody could accuse him of selling out Taiwan, the country he risked his life to save from the devastating SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) epidemic in 2003.

....

And where was President Chen's son-in-law when the SARS epidemic hit Taiwan?” Yeh asked. Chao Chien-ming, an orthopedic surgeon at the Taiwan University Hospital, asked for a long leave of absence to avoid seeing patients for fear that he might be infected.

As you can see, for the KMT, it all comes back to Chen Shui-bian. Whenever something goes wrong -- quick! Mention Chen Shui-bian! If the car doesn't start, A-bian took the spark plug. If the dog craps on the rug, A-bian forgot to walk him. Pan-Blue couple getting a divorce? Affair with A-bian, of course. I hear the break-up of Pangaea was due to A-bian's malign influence.....

The leader of the pack was one Huang Hai-ning, aka the Taidu Spice Girl or the Taidu Beauty, according to the Liberty Times report today. The daughter of DPP politicians, originally hailing from Taichung county (she appears to have left when I arrived; this can't be a coincidence), she is studying in Paris, and drove down to Geneva to pay a call on the Health Minister. Good PR move....

J Michael pointed out that they did at least alert people to the fact that there were Taiwanese who were peeved and who were willing to risk arrest to let the world know. UPDATE: Got it totally wrong -- misunderstood the Liberty Times report. My bad guys. See comments for the corrections... I post one here:

I can translate, but don't have the time right now. The main point is that Taidu Spice Girl was extremely poised and extremely rational, and nothing like the China Post description or yours. She posed two very important questions repeatedly, the first being 1) What name is Taiwan joining the WHO under? Chinese Taipei or Province of China. The first is ugly, but the second is noxious and if used officially, would mean certain death to the international support Taiwan has built up worldwide over many years that is so crucial to its continued security. She later asks Yeh ironically to tell her what country she belongs to.

Yeh is completely off his rocker and his response in any normal situation would result in an immediate resignation. He was the one that yelled at the girl that she couldn't speak Taiwanese (she can), then says he "loves Taiwan more than her" (she says this is irrelevant and what's important are the implications for Taiwan's sovereignty). Yeh repeatedly yells at her that she is shameless, useless, an embarrassment, and tries to speak Taiwanese and English to shout her into submission. In one of the most absolutely noteworthy part of the clip, a KMT legislator tells Yeh that maybe he can speak to her and the media about their concerns in a "gentlemanly" manner.

No one accused Yeh of selling out Taiwan or was making a personal attack on Yeh. The student protesters outside were chanting "DON'T sell out Taiwan". All the language issues, the "who loves Taiwan more" issue--those were all brought up by Yeh himself in his nonsensical replies.

The girls, who in most news reports numbered two, but in the China Post became a dozen, were arrested briefly and then released. Naturally Minister Yeh threatened legal action -- in Taiwan.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!