社會觀察 . 獨立評論 . 多元觀點 . 公共書寫 . 世代翻轉

  • Home
  • English
  • 評論
  • 民意
  • 時事
  • 生活
  • 國際
  • 歷史
  • 世代
  • 轉載
  • 投稿須知

WHO – better health for everyone everywhere except Taiwan

  • English Article
  • 時事
  • 民意
  • 評論

Surely the existential threat posed by disease is sufficient reason to include Taiwan in the WHA. A change in mindset is needed to make the WHO into the inclusive organization it claims to be.

The World Health Assembly (WHA), the decision-making body of the World Health Organization (WHO), meets 20–28 May in Geneva. Although the WHO promises “better health for everyone, everywhere,” the organization systematically excludes one country from the annual discussions. Taiwan, officially known as the Republic of China (ROC), has one of the world’s best medical systems and can make important scientific contributions. Yet, Taiwan is not permitted to send a delegation to WHA meetings, even with observer status, to share knowledge about urgent health threats.

WHO needs Taiwan. Photo source: CivilMedia.tw
WHO needs Taiwan. Photo source: CivilMedia.tw

This situation, like that at all United Nations (UN) venues, is a relic of the Cold War when two governments disputed which could legitimately represent China. Of course, only the People’s Republic of China (PRC) can represent the 1.386 billion people living within its jurisdiction. But what about the 23 million people who live on independently ruled Taiwan, with its Ministry of Health and Welfare entirely under Taiwanese control? What about the entire ecology of microorganisms that spread disease across borders with no regard for political disputes?

The Challenge of Preventing Pandemics

Since viruses know no boundaries and do not discriminate between citizenries, the exclusion of Taiwan is an important gap in the global health system. Taiwan learned this lesson quite painfully in 2003 when an epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) took 181 lives (27%) out of 668 confirmed cases.

In retrospect, public health experts understood that one obstacle was that Taiwan is not part of the WHO and thus could not access needed epidemiological data and virus samples in a timely fashion. Taiwanese medical professionals, excluded from face-to-face WHO meetings, had to rely on the WHO website and ask other countries (especially the USA) to share data. From 2009 to 2016, Taiwan was permitted to attend the WHA as an observer under the name Chinese Taipei. Since 2017, however, China has taken a hardline stance against Taiwan and blocked its participation.

Nowadays, the greatest threats seem to be zoonotic influenza viruses — viruses that first infect animals and then spread into human populations. Avian influenza, which affects poultry but could potentially mutate and infect humans, has appeared in two strains in Taiwan since 2003. In 2019, the main concerns are Hog cholera and African swine fever. Taiwan takes all possible measures to avoid a pandemic outbreak, including using automated sensors to test incoming air passengers for fevers and strictly enforcing laws on illegally importing meat. To be fully successful, such efforts need the international co-operation that only the WHO can provide.

Democratic Allies Support Taiwan

Political leaders from democratic countries are beginning to express concern about this situation and show support for Taiwanese participation. In 2018, the European Parliament passed a resolution saying that the exclusion of Taiwan from the WHO is not in line with EU interests. On 9 April this year, when questioned by the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade about Taiwan’s participation in the WHA, Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland replied that Canada supports Taiwan’s “participation in international multilateral fora where its presence provides important contributions to the global public good.”

Diplomats tasked with maintaining good relations with China, while supporting Taiwan’s bids for international space, make diplomatic somersaults to plead their case. In his remarks at the 40thanniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act, for example, US Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State W. Patrick Murphy reiterated the long-standing American policy:

“The United States will continue to support Taiwan’s membership in international organizations where statehood is not a requirement for membership, and its meaningful participation in international organizations where statehood is a requirement

Statehood is the Issue

Pretending that there is no independent state on Taiwan overlooks the facts that Taiwan possesses a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. In fact, having all of these characteristics make it a state according to the definition of the 1933 Montevideo Convention.

Technically, Taiwan is not a state, but the ROC is. Taiwan as a society is still debating whether they should maintain the ROC, a constitutional framework that might one day enable the emergence of a larger democratic China. Beijing is impatient with Taiwan’s boisterous democracy, which means that no elected government has moved too quickly toward either independence or unification for fear of alienating voters and losing power. China thus tries to coerce Taiwan through external means, such as vetoing Taiwan’s attempts to enter the WHA.

The refusal of the WHA and other international bodies to recognize ROC statehood has two important consequences. The first is in Taiwan itself. As China succeeds in constraining Taiwan’s international space, Taiwanese people lose confidence in their government to represent them to the world. This destabilizes Taiwan’s hard-won democracy. The second consequence is that diplomats and political leaders learn to perceive Taiwan only in its relationship with China rather than as an independent sociopolitical reality.

Denying the existence of a state on Taiwan begs the question of what Taiwan actually is. Obviously, it is not a non-governmental organization like the Red Cross, which has observer status. Taiwan’s contested status in the international arena more closely resembles Palestine, which has held observer status in the WHA since 1974 and in the UN since 2012, but which is excluded from other international entities due to American opposition. Both Taiwan and Palestine are limited in their international aspirations due to great power politics, but only Palestine gains a seat at the table at the WHA. Taiwan should be no different in terms of prioritizing human health over politics.

Taiwan is already a part of several other international organizations, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. These provide sufficient precedents for pragmatically including both the PRC and the ROC. Surely the existential threat posed by disease is sufficient reason to include Taiwan in the WHA. A change in mindset is needed to make the WHO into the inclusive organization it claims to be.

Author / Scott Simon

Scott Simon, Ph.D., is Professor in the School of Sociological and Anthropological Studies, Co-holder of the Chair in Taiwan Studies, and Researcher at CIPS, University of Ottawa. Proficient in both Mandarin Chinese and Japanese, he has conducted research on various social and political issues in China, Taiwan, and Japan. He is the author of three books about Taiwan.

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • More
  • Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Related

Taiwan WHO 國際
2019-05-22 Scott Simon

Post navigation

看郭董「舔盤子」拚形象改造 → ← 賴清德如果想退,現在是良機

Related Posts

濫發現金與反罷動員:從全民普樂走向財政危機

近年來,台灣經濟表現優異,因此增加不少稅收,故蔡政府時代有「普發現金」政策,同時振興因疫情蕭條的其他產業,達成「共享經濟成果」、「照顧全民」目標。這種政策本是利民之舉,若無一合理機制監督發放數量、發放標準,恐怕成為某黨某人的助選工具,畢竟「普樂現象」養成全民由奢入儉難,一旦普發現金成為常態,遇到財政荒年試問國庫受得了無理的折騰嗎? 其實不難看出普發現金所以趕在七八月左右闖關,仍是藍白為箭在弦上的大罷免造勢,不惜以交換台電補助案為籌碼迫使行政院讓步。台灣當前政治正逐漸陷入民粹動員與短期投票考量主導的惡性循環。試想,在貧富差距擴大、數量同時呈現兩極下,一萬元在高級白領眼中也許意義不大,但在許多底層人民卻是能補貼數月開銷,故普發一萬須均衡財政及民心,藍白精明地用議案挑撥部分選區民意,或形塑執政當局不諳民間疾苦的印象。 民主制度設計的本意,是讓民意監督政策、考核施政,但當「金錢動員」成為常態,便等於將政策討好凌駕於理性公共辯論之上。長期而言,選民將習慣於選舉前「領一波」的收買式政策,而非檢驗施政的長遠規劃與國家治理能力。這種「短期利益換取選票」的現象,是典型的民粹陷阱。 台灣當前財政表面上看似穩健,實則隱藏長期危機。普發現金雖來自「超徵稅收」,但實際上,政府長期依賴舉債與基金動用來填補財政缺口。例如勞保基金已出現結構性赤字、軍公教退休撥補壓力沉重,再加上地方政府舉債空間緊縮,中央大撒幣之舉將加速推升財政風險。 更可怕的是,當普發成為「政治標準配備」,將來的執政者無論黨派都會面臨「不發就選輸」的政治壓力。這種情況下,政府會被迫壓縮長期投資(如基礎建設、教育改革、能源轉型、面臨對岸壓力不得不提升國防費用),轉而不斷提高短期民粹支出。若再結合高齡化社會的需求膨脹,台灣的財政結構可能在一代之內出現崩解。試問,勞健保無財政挹注,未來個戶所負擔範圍恐增加;軍公教薪資不增恐使服務品質下降,以上情況無疑是長期普發現金的隱藏待爆的危機。然而,遺憾的是一旦有選舉存在了,這種民粹式立法可能層出不窮,當局至少做出嚴格排富機制,暫時取得折衷,或訂立一部嚴謹普發現金機制,防止立法院以其他法案要脅通過普發現金。 民主政治的核心,在於人民透過理性選擇決定國家未來,但當選票淪為金錢政策競賽的籌碼,罷免制度成為政黨鬥爭的工具,台灣的民主便面臨制度性崩壞的危險。普發現金與罷免亂象不是個別事件,而是整體政治文化與制度設計缺陷的反映。若無視此一危機,台灣或將從「選舉熱鬧」邁向「民主空洞」,最終自毀長城。真正的改革,不是再多一萬元,而是一場全民對制度正義與財政永續的深度覺醒。 作者:風林火山

從「窮花蓮、富崐萁」到「窮台灣、富崐萁」

最近傅崐萁的罷免案進入關鍵階段,從縣府活動出現反罷免扇子,到縣長徐榛蔚公開替老公站台,還有那個AB版邀請卡的爭議,這些事情讓大家開始思考一個問題:傅崐萁在花蓮玩的那套,現在是不是要搬到中央來了? 花蓮縣議員胡仁順講得很直白:「窮花蓮、富崐萁」。這不是隨便說說的,而是真的有在地人的觀察。傅崐萁掌握縣府預算,議會又過半,透過補助綁樁、預算施壓,形成了一個很難打破的利益網絡。結果呢?花蓮建設停滯,年輕人一直外流,連觀光都被台東超越,經濟民生越來越差。 更讓人擔心的是,這種模式現在正在往中央擴張。原本中央預算應該用在基礎建設、國防、少子化對策這些長遠規劃上,現在卻變成大規模的地方補助和選舉利益交換。這種舉債方式被質疑違反預算法,根本就是把國家資源私有化,用納稅人的錢買政治忠誠和選票。 如果一個立委可以把國家預算當成自己選區的「政治提款卡」,那其他地方勢必有樣學樣,中央政府就沒辦法以公共利益為核心分配資源,只能在地方政治壓力下,不斷淪為補助和特定勢力交易的工具。當預算不再服務國家戰略,而只是用來鞏固個人勢力時,受害的就是全體台灣人民。 「窮花蓮、富崐萁」已經是很多花蓮人的共同感受,如果現在不處理,讓傅崐萁把這套模式複製到中央,我們就要面對「窮台灣、富崐萁」的局面。國家不該成為某個政治人物的提款機,民主機制也不該被人利用來操控資源、綁架制度。 這次罷免行動,對花蓮人來說是一次覺醒,對台灣人來說是對抗腐敗、守護民主的試煉。如果讓傅崐萁繼續擴權,未來更多預算不會用來修橋鋪路,而是用來鋪陳權力的延伸。現在不罷免,以後就更難回頭了。 胡仁順問得很對:「不罷你罷誰?」這不是情緒性的發洩,而是台灣公民面對政治腐化時最基本的民主防衛。民主制度不是讓政治人物發財的管道,而是讓人民過好日子的工具。現在,該是時候把不適任的人請出我們的公共體制了。 作者:林政武

「萬元黨」除了大撒幣,還會有甚麼花招 ?

「萬元黨」除了大撒幣,當然會有其他花招。招術會推陳佈新,花樣百出,令人民眼花瞭亂!因為他們這樣做,可以大舉收獲政治利益,而不必負政治責任,何樂而不為 ? 「萬元黨」立法院的其它花招?例如說,新的錢坑法案、計對特殊行業、地區、和對「萬元黨」一向友好的選民、政治同路人,後頭大老板交待事項,當然要巧妙立法,名正而言順,美其名為人民的利益和福利著想,不支持他們的法案就是和人民「對幹」! 許多人都知道:經濟學的第一要義,財富是稀有的,而且擁有行政權來支配財富分配的政府,是不會「創造財富」的。因此政府用「財政政策」(fiscal policy )來經營現有的有限財富,以促進經濟發展、增加人民就業機會、福利的支出,更要審時度勢,小心翼翼。成本效益( cost effective )和風險更是執政者必須考慮的首要條件。 行政權是要對政策成敗負責和被追究的;而擁有立法權的立法委員的唯一考慮,是要和選民維持超好關係,因此可以大力撒幣,不顧經濟後果,美其名為「福國利民」:兩者有顯著的不同。如果某些不稱職的立委,人民對其「仇恨值」高,卻可躲在「人民利益」的籍口下,以萬元大撒幣,躲避「被罷免」的危險,台灣人民該做何想? 例如說,中華民國公民會在意領到可以飽餐一頓的萬元自助餐,All you can eat,而不會思索萬元累積下來,可以建造八艘海鯤號潛艇,來保衛中華民國的海彊 ? 這些立法院可能的弊端,足以說明立法院( 國會 )只能有「預算審查權」,而不能有「預算創造權」的理由。立法委員有開會期間的「言論保護權」,不能被追究,眼前「萬元黨」的大撒幣,正在意圖破壞和超越憲法權力平衡的綱紀:「萬元黨」不是擁有預算權的行政機關,他們只能減少預算,而不能任意增加新的預算項目。 「萬元黨」難道不明白這些憲政網領?他們妖言惑眾,顛倒是非,你我不得不懷疑他們是明知故犯。如果他們只是害怕私人利益受損,政治前途受的致命的打擊,狗急跳牆,團進團退,不得不然,沒有其它深沈、陰暗的企圖,你我小公民們倒是可以給予「同情性的了解」,與人為善嗎 ? 台北政治達人間,倒是流傳一種陰謀論:這可不是「廟小妖風大」的問題,而是「大陰謀」的第一步:若任其循序漸進,接下來就是打砸、打爛,越亂越好,革命形勢越好!那麼事件就會是很大條了! 你我小公民們可不能輕忽「大罷免」所提供的歷史性機緣:它若大成功,必然會開始清除數十年來歷史所殘留的邪𤫊。「民主民團」的努力才會中流砥柱,破此反歷史的旋渦和暗流。因此,你我小民們可需要「思想武裝」,台灣的自由民主的命脈,才會長存 ! 作者: 張𧗽

朱立倫「普發現金」的謊言 !

國民黨主席朱立倫近日拋出一個看似「國際接軌」的說法,聲稱「全球都在用普發現金來對抗通膨與經濟低迷」,並舉韓國與新加坡為例,企圖為在野黨聯手強推的「全民普發一萬元」政策背書。然而,這番說詞不僅是對國際經濟政策的嚴重誤讀,更是一場精心包裝的政治謊言。 首先,南韓確實在7月21日開始發放現金,這是南韓面對「經濟連續四季接近零成長」的救急措施,試問,台灣的經濟現況是如此慘澹嗎?更關鍵的是,南韓的發放現金政策是由執政黨政府主動提出,經過國會審查批准的正常預算程序。這與台灣在野黨透過掌控的國會,無視執政黨政府實際施政需求,強行通過普發現金的政治操作有著天壤之別。在野黨試圖掏空國庫、挽救大罷免選情,救急的只有自己的立委席次。 筆者建議民進黨政府,在野黨如此在意抗通膨與經濟低迷,何不敦請立法院共體時艱,將自家的業務費刪至一元,立委諸公這三個月(六至八月)無端延會衍生而來的出席費與津貼分毫不取,午餐不但不吃麥當勞,便當配菜更只剩一顆滷蛋,相信在野黨一定會樂為人民表率。 其次,新加坡的消費稅補助券(現金補助)早在2012年就開始實施,這是行之有年的社會福利政策,竟然被朱立倫拿來包裝成呼應其對抗通膨與經濟低迷的「新」措施,這種移花接木的手法,一如國民黨過去造假的本質,為了政治利益,可以不擇手段扭曲事實的原貌。 新加坡這項政策的設計精細,針對不同收入階層、年齡層、住屋年值等條件,提供差異化的補助金額,是一套成熟的社會保障制度,國民黨想學就好好學,不要只知其一、不知其二。 最後,國民黨與民眾黨聯手推動的普發現金政策,一方面慷國庫之慨,用民眾的納稅錢救大罷免選情;另一方面卻堅持刪除撥補台電的預算,讓電價失控上漲,最終還是要民眾承擔後果。 這種「短期甜頭換長期痛苦」的政治操作,用一萬元現金來欺騙民眾,聲稱足夠支付「未來四年」的電費漲價。這種荒謬的數字遊戲,不僅缺乏基本的經濟常識,不但是對民眾智慧的侮辱,更代表國民黨只想癱瘓台灣運作的現況,絲毫沒有想要再度執政、為了台灣好的共好思維。 作者:秦靖

Recent Posts

從「窮花蓮、富崐萁」到「窮台灣、富崐萁」

從「窮花蓮、富崐萁」到「窮台灣、富崐萁」

最近傅崐萁的罷免案進入關鍵階段,從縣府活動出現反罷免扇子,到縣長徐榛蔚公開替老公站台,還有那個AB版邀請卡的爭議,這些事情讓大家開始思考一個問題:傅崐萁在花蓮玩的那套,現在是不是要搬到中央來了? [...]

More Info
濫發現金與反罷動員:從全民普樂走向財政危機

濫發現金與反罷動員:從全民普樂走向財政危機

近年來,台灣經濟表現優異,因此增加不少稅收,故蔡政府時代有「普發現金」政策,同時振興因疫情蕭條的其他產業,達成「共享經濟成果」、「照顧全民」目標。這種政策本是利民之舉,若無一合理機制監督發放數量、發放標準,恐怕成為某黨某人的助選工具,畢竟「普樂現象」養成全民由奢入儉難,一旦普發現金成為常態,遇到財政荒年試問國庫受得了無理的折騰嗎? [...]

More Info
「萬元黨」除了大撒幣,還會有甚麼花招 ?

「萬元黨」除了大撒幣,還會有甚麼花招 ?

「萬元黨」除了大撒幣,當然會有其他花招。招術會推陳佈新,花樣百出,令人民眼花瞭亂!因為他們這樣做,可以大舉收獲政治利益,而不必負政治責任,何樂而不為 ? 「萬元黨」立法院的其它花招?例如說,新的錢坑法案、計對特殊行業、地區、和對「萬元黨」一向友好的選民、政治同路人,後頭大老板交待事項,當然要巧妙立法,名正而言順,美其名為人民的利益和福利著想,不支持他們的法案就是和人民「對幹」! [...]

More Info
朱立倫「普發現金」的謊言 !

朱立倫「普發現金」的謊言 !

國民黨主席朱立倫近日拋出一個看似「國際接軌」的說法,聲稱「全球都在用普發現金來對抗通膨與經濟低迷」,並舉韓國與新加坡為例,企圖為在野黨聯手強推的「全民普發一萬元」政策背書。然而,這番說詞不僅是對國際經濟政策的嚴重誤讀,更是一場精心包裝的政治謊言。 [...]

More Info

搜尋

精選文章

川習會的中美矛盾是戰略,不是貿易!

2017-04-08 韓非

八仙樂園爆炸案:缺乏常識造成的災難

2015-06-28 異想

彰化縣民輪替後的哀與愁

2016-03-06 許家瑋

新文明病:儲物症(Hoarding disorder)似正在增加

2015-04-13 楊庸一

訂閱本站

輸入你的電子郵件訂閱新文章並接收新通知。

Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way
Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way