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

The Hidden Crisis in North America’s Chinatowns:

Behind the Facade, Migrants Confront Exploitation, Precarity, and a Recast American Dream. Across major cities in North America, the familiar sights of Chinatown—busy restaurants, multilingual shop signs, and bustling markets—suggest […]

鐵拳之下的脆弱秩序──從伊朗街頭血腥鎮壓看威權穩定的幻象

    從香港反送中運動、經濟衰退等激起人民抗爭卻受鎮壓後,伊朗也步入類似情境,竟以強硬手段鎮壓示威民眾,畫面中不乏實彈、拘捕與資訊封鎖。表面上,這似乎只是又一次威權政體面對內部經濟或政治腐敗不滿的「老劇本」;然,事實上深層因果恐非表面上簡單。 首先,伊朗內部的不穩定,核心仍在於長期累積的治理失靈。經濟層面上,制裁導致通膨高企、青年失業嚴重,資源分配高度傾斜於宗教與安全體系,社會階層流動幾近停滯,即使伊朗受中國經援、仍發與人民部分高福利。惟政治層面上,神權體制將重大決策排除於民意之外,選舉與代議機制形式化,人民缺乏可被制度吸納的不滿出口。當制度無法消化壓力,街頭自然成為最後的宣洩場域,而國家機器回應的方式,也往往只剩下暴力。 其次,國際地緣政治確實構成背景,但並非直接導火線。伊朗長期處於美國主導的制裁體系之下,近年又捲入中東衝突與大國博弈。中美對抗的結構,使伊朗在戰略上更傾向與「反西方陣營」靠攏,藉此取得外交與經濟喘息空間。然而,這種外部對抗並未轉化為內部改革的動力,反而強化神權統治塑造你者與他者的區分,強化神權集團統治合法性。 伊朗短期內不太可能出現體制性崩解。行政機關與宗教高度綁定、宗教權威仍具動員力,加上能源與區域影響力,使政權具有一定韌性。但中長期風險正在累積,人口結構年輕化與價值觀世俗化,加上網路全球化,其對外資訊之禁絕、社會之封閉遠不及北韓,年輕世代要不選擇苟活於境內;要不選擇遠走高飛。剩下的年輕人在經濟與發展無望下,陷入長期與當局示威又被鎮壓的惡性循環,政權或可維持「穩定」,但那是一種以高成本換取的脆弱平衡,如同借鏡中共維穩模式。 對台灣而言,伊朗地理距離太遠、經濟與制度迥異太深,仍有其深刻的啟示,不在於宗教或文化差異,而在於國家如何處理社會不滿與外部壓力的交織。目前,台灣如同伊朗一般面對經濟差距擴大、薪資停滯與朝野惡鬥,許多年輕人似乎看不見未來,竟將所有因素概括責難執政當局,莫忘從國際組織數據觀之,我國無論在政府廉潔程度、治理能力、經濟發展或民主開放度幾乎位列東亞之冠,如再以全球貧富差距、動盪化外部因素不由分說地責難當局,無疑一種純粹的情緒宣洩、未見理性。藍白所以有恃無恐,正是利用這股不滿情緒,人慣於將自身不滿責難於執政者,認為投票給某候選人即應有對應政治服務,恰與近代民主憲政邏輯相悖,國家與人民權義關係契約寫於憲法而非消費者權益保護法,政府作用在於守疆衛土、維護治安、穩定經濟與制定國策而非如同「阿拉丁神燈」一般滿足所有人慾望。 當前,有志國人總將藍白之亂歸因於政客煽動,事實上,選民素質方決定政治人物素質。台灣在民主上遠勝伊朗,保障一切權利自由,國內局勢卻見一股隱然的騷動;此際,執政黨應以伊朗為戒,台灣與之同為為地緣樞,紐亟需穩定內政,否則將受強鄰染指。當前之務應降低執政黨內部因選舉帶來的分裂,先安內後攘外;其次,適度放權予立院協商議案,欲得之先予之,可拉攏藍白內部理性者,尤其是區域立委,國昌所以趾高氣焰在於不分區立委無須向選民負責,故繞過爭議人物尋找適當破口;久之,鬆散聯盟將一觸可破;最後,台灣經貿與美國綁定,立委諸公們想必在這番股市收益不少,應知箇中因素,適度讓美國介入不妨是一個好選擇,逼迫藍白在中美之間抉擇,而非以傳統政黨惡鬥來問政。 作者 / 風林火山

委內瑞拉、烏克蘭、伊朗與台灣:四種截然不同的國際處境

在全球局勢持續動盪的當下,委內瑞拉、烏克蘭與伊朗常被用來與台灣比較。然而,這三國的危機來源、政治結構與國際定位,其實與台灣大不相同,理解這些差異有助於更精確地評估台灣的安全環境。 委內瑞拉的問題主要來自 內部治理崩壞。長期的威權統治、經濟政策失當與對石油的過度依賴,使該國陷入惡性通膨與大規模外逃潮。國際社會介入的主軸是制裁與人道援助。相比之下,台灣擁有成熟的民主制度、穩健的財政與科技產業,不存在國家功能失效的問題。 烏克蘭則是 主權遭鄰國直接以武力入侵 的典型案例。其國際邊界明確,俄羅斯的行動明顯違反國際法,因此引發全球大規模援助。台灣雖面臨中國的軍事壓力,但兩岸關係涉及歷史與政治定位,複雜程度高於俄烏邊界的法律清晰度。同時,台灣在全球半導體與科技供應鏈中的關鍵性,使得其安危牽動世界經濟,國際反應的型態自然不同。 伊朗則代表第三類情境:意識形態強烈、並積極參與中東代理戰爭的區域強權。其國際矛盾多源於核計畫、宗教政治體制與地緣衝突。台灣沒有輸出革命、支持武裝組織,也無意在區域擴張,因此其外部壓力並非因自身行為引起,而是來自中國對主權的主張。 綜觀三國案例,台灣最大的不同在於:第一,台灣的內部政經體質穩健,不像委內瑞拉因國家治理危機而動盪;第二,台灣的國際重要性極高,其科技供應鏈角色與烏克蘭截然不同;第三,台灣未曾引發區域衝突,與伊朗的地緣政治行為無法相比。 因此,將台灣簡單類比這三國並不精準。台灣的挑戰主要源自外部強權的壓力,而其穩健制度、經濟實力與國際支持,使其處境雖艱難,卻與那些因內部危機或意識形態衝突而陷入混亂的國家本質不同。 作者:寧為渣

只敢在立法院拍桌咆哮,不敢在華盛頓大小聲

立法院向來音量分貝最大聲的黃國昌,在訪美回國的記者會異常安靜。 前幾天倉促宣布訪問美國。沒有大張旗鼓的行前記者會,沒有隨團記者的鏡頭簇擁,甚至連當地行程都保密到家。總是將公開透明掛在嘴邊的國會戰神,低調進入AIT華盛頓總部,與其說是風光的政黨外交,更像是被迫成行的「緊急召見」。   要理解華府為何在此刻出手,要從印太戰略的視角來看。台灣政府提出8年1.25兆的預算案,並不只是單純的軍購數字,更是台灣向國際(尤其是美國)遞出的「自我防衛決心證明書」。   台海情勢升溫,美國積極建構印太第一島鏈的防禦網,希望台灣加速不對稱戰力的建構。然而,立法院內在野黨聯手杯葛、拖延、阻擋預算,對美方而言已經不是單純的內部朝野攻防,而是釋放出「台灣對抗意志動搖」的危險訊號。小則影響台美軍事合作期程,大至造成印太安全體系的防衛缺口。   AIT處長谷立言多次穿梭藍白陣營,苦口婆心溝通卻屢屢碰壁,華府的戰略耐性顯然已到臨界點。既然台北的代理人講不通,那就直接把相關決策者請到華盛頓面對面「溝通」。   這場會面的時間點精算得令人玩味。依照民眾黨內規的「兩年條款」,黃國昌的立委任期僅剩不到兩個月。在一般的華府政治邏輯裡,一位即將卸任國會議員的在野黨主席,長期投資價值其實是相當低的。   然而華府也很清楚,黃國昌個人的政治壽命或許有變數,但他手中握有的民眾黨團八席立委,是當下解開國會僵局的唯一鑰匙。美方不在乎黃國昌兩年後在哪裡,他們在乎立法院這個會期,民眾黨那八隻手舉起來的方向。   熟悉台美關係運作的人士認為,這次會面美方態度異常嚴肅,甚至帶有幾分訓斥意味。尤其,政壇盛傳黃國昌之子擁有美國籍的背景,在這場涉及美國國家利益的談判桌上,無疑成為無形卻強大的心理籌碼。面對美國老大哥,黃國昌過往在立法院對著官員拍桌咆哮的氣焰,來到波多馬克河畔,恐怕無所施展。   黃國昌返台後的記者會,媒體問他此行見了哪些人、談了什麼內容,昔日對黑箱作業斥之以鼻、堅持會議紀錄公開上網的戰神,竟變得語焉不詳,以私人行程、雙方默契輕輕帶過。   公開透明遇到美方壓力,似乎有了妥協空間。這場在AIT總部的閉門會談,黃國昌的閃爍其詞,證實了外界對於他「被拉正」的判斷與想定。尤其,美國官員對此行也同樣低調冷處理,沒有公開聲明、沒有合影留念;比起政黨領袖的外交訪問,而是像是美國老大哥緊急的召見、當面的拉正與告誡。   視角拉回民眾黨內部,這場訪美行也折射出柯文哲、黃國昌兩個太陽的微妙角力。柯文哲深知國防預算議題是燙手山芋,由黃國昌赴美承接美方壓力,不僅能讓黃暫時遠離立法院黨團的權力核心,更能藉此讓黃在國人面前顏面無光。   若黃國昌因美方壓力轉向支持預算,勢必得罪部分深藍支持者;若他堅持杯葛,則直接得罪美國老大哥。這場由美國導演、柯文哲默許的戲碼,讓黃國昌陷入了進退維谷的尷尬處境。   這場倉促難堪的華府行,或許是黃國昌從政以來最安靜的一次,也是訊號最響亮的一次。至於黃國昌在AIT總部裡究竟談到了什麼?答案,很快就會在立法院揭曉。 作者:江諺行

Recent Posts

The Hidden Crisis in North America’s Chinatowns:

The Hidden Crisis in North America’s Chinatowns:

Behind the Facade, Migrants Confront Exploitation, Precarity, and a Recast American Dream. Across major cities in North America, the familiar sights of Chinatown—busy restaurants, multilingual [...]

More Info
鐵拳之下的脆弱秩序──從伊朗街頭血腥鎮壓看威權穩定的幻象

鐵拳之下的脆弱秩序──從伊朗街頭血腥鎮壓看威權穩定的幻象

    從香港反送中運動、經濟衰退等激起人民抗爭卻受鎮壓後,伊朗也步入類似情境,竟以強硬手段鎮壓示威民眾,畫面中不乏實彈、拘捕與資訊封鎖。表面上,這似乎只是又一次威權政體面對內部經濟或政治腐敗不滿的「老劇本」;然,事實上深層因果恐非表面上簡單。 [...]

More Info
委內瑞拉、烏克蘭、伊朗與台灣:四種截然不同的國際處境

委內瑞拉、烏克蘭、伊朗與台灣:四種截然不同的國際處境

在全球局勢持續動盪的當下,委內瑞拉、烏克蘭與伊朗常被用來與台灣比較。然而,這三國的危機來源、政治結構與國際定位,其實與台灣大不相同,理解這些差異有助於更精確地評估台灣的安全環境。 委內瑞拉的問題主要來自 [...]

More Info
只敢在立法院拍桌咆哮,不敢在華盛頓大小聲

只敢在立法院拍桌咆哮,不敢在華盛頓大小聲

立法院向來音量分貝最大聲的黃國昌,在訪美回國的記者會異常安靜。 前幾天倉促宣布訪問美國。沒有大張旗鼓的行前記者會,沒有隨團記者的鏡頭簇擁,甚至連當地行程都保密到家。總是將公開透明掛在嘴邊的國會戰神,低調進入AIT華盛頓總部,與其說是風光的政黨外交,更像是被迫成行的「緊急召見」。   [...]

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