Remarks at the Videoconference with Prominent European Opinion Leaders in Geneva
Chen Shui-bian
President
Republic of China (Taiwan)
May 19, 2006
On May 19, 2006, President of the Republic of China (Taiwan) Chen Shui-bian held a videoconference with prominent opinion leaders in Geneva, Switzerland. Panelists included AmbassadorWu Shu-min, president of the Foundation of Medical Professionals Alliance in Taiwan; Dr. Willem van der Geest, director of the European Institute of Asian Studies; Dr. Philippe Régnier, director of the Centre for Asian Studies at the University of Geneva; Mr. Konrad Szymanski, Polish member of the European Parliament; and Dr. Kgosi Letlape, president of the World Medical Association. After delivering his introductory remarks, President Chen held discussions with the panelists, and then took questions from international journalists in attendance.
Opening remarks by President Chen Shui-bian
Director van der Geest, Ambassador Wu, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen:
Good morning!
It is indeed a great pleasure to have this opportunity to meet with our European friends via this videoconference. Although quite a distance lies between Taiwan and Europe, we share a belief in the universal values of freedom, democracy, human rights, and peace, and it is these values that have laid a most important foundation for an increasingly close relationship of exchanges and interactions between Taiwan and the European Union.
The European Union is currently Taiwan's fourth-largest trading partner in the world. Taiwan has established representative offices in most EU member states, while the European Union's establishment of the European Chamber of Commerce Taipei (ECCT) on March 10, 2003, marked a milestone in the development of Taiwan-EU relations.
The European Parliament has also passed a number of important resolutions in recent years. These have supported Taiwan's participation in activities conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and its attendance as an observer at the World Health Assembly (WHA); called on China to remove the missiles it has deployed along its southeastern coast targeted at Taiwan; and firmly maintained that cross-strait differences and disputes should be resolved peacefully through dialogue rather than through the use of force or other non-peaceful means.
Yesterday the European Parliament again passed a resolution in support of Taiwan's endeavors. It also called for the immediate inclusion of the Taiwan Center for Disease Control (CDC) as a participant in the WHO Global Outbreak and Alert Response Network (GOARN).
Similarly, when Beijing passed its "anti-separation law" (the so-called anti-secession law) last year in spite of unanimous opposition from the international community, the European Union responded by issuing an open statement expressing grave concern and passing a resolution to continue its arms embargo against China, which has been imposed for 17 years since the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989. This move was intended to prevent an imbalance of military power in the Taiwan Strait. The European Union feared that totalitarian China, in possession of state-of-the-art weaponry, could pose a threat to Taiwan, which enjoys freedom, democracy, and prosperity, and that this could lead to a unilateral change to the peaceful status quo in the Taiwan Strait.
On behalf of the government and 23 million people of Taiwan, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude and highest respect to the EU member states and their peoples for their support of a democratic Taiwan, and for their actions that have promoted stability and peace in the Asia-Pacific region.
With its further enlargement and integration, the European Union has wielded more influence in the world community. I look forward to an even more important role for the European Union in the expansion of democracy globally, protection of human rights, and preservation of peace. In particular, I would like to call on the European Union to exert its power to facilitate China's democratization and to urge China to become a responsible stakeholder in the international community.
At the same time, I hope the European Union will give its strong support to democratic Taiwan's participation in international affairs with the same status as other nations. This includes support for our inclusion in the Geneva-based WHO, so that Taiwan can contribute more to the international community.
Some of you may not know, but Taiwan was one of the original advocates for the establishment of the WHO. In 1945, Taiwan and Brazil jointly advocated establishing a new international health body at the United Nations Conference on International Organization. Subsequently, in 1948, the United Nations formally ratified the WHO Constitution, which declared that the WHO's objective is the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognizes that health is an essential element of human rights, and that no nation should obstruct the right to health of other nations.
The WHO has an obligation, therefore, to provide all peoples with the best medical health services irrespective of their nationality. It should not sacrifice its noble ideals on the altar of brute political force.
Although Taiwan has long been excluded from the world health system because of China's relentless and arbitrary oppression, we continue to seek opportunities through various appropriate channels and means to contribute to international medical care as well as public health.
At present, Taiwan has technical missions and medical teams stationed in nations in Central and South America, Africa, and the South Pacific to help boost local agricultural development as well as to improve medical services in those countries. In Africa, we offer AIDS prevention assistance to our allies Malawi and Swaziland. In São Tomé and Principe, the Missão Médica de Taiwan helps local people exterminate malaria mosquitoes.
Over the past ten years, Taiwan has contributed more than US$450 million in emergency medical and health relief, including aid distributed to people affected by the South Asian tsunami and humanitarian assistance given to refugees in Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. We also established "Taiwan International Health Action" (TaiwanIHA) this year to effectively integrate the medical resources of the public and private sectors, so that we can make more contributions to the health of peoples around the world.
In July of 2003, we used the US$10 million Taiwan's people donated for SARS prevention to establish the Taiwan Urbani Foundation, named in honor of Carlo Urbani, the Italian doctor who first identified and then died of SARS, for his contributions and self-sacrifice in the quest to promote health. The foundation will spare no effort to help prevent new epidemics and increase Taiwan's exchanges with the international community.
In recent decades, Taiwan has never been absent from the process of improving and strengthening the quality of international medical care and sanitation. Nevertheless, Taiwan has, to date, been left as a missing link in the global health and medical system. That is to say, the 23 million people of Taiwan are being denied their human right to health, and the nearly 400,000 foreign residents in Taiwan are being denied their rights and assurances regarding health and security. This is completely unfair, and might even be called unethical.
The tragic experience of SARS in 2003 taught us that, with the continuous flow of people and commodities between countries in this era of globalization, the international community should endeavor to realize the goal of a global disease prevention network without any gaps. The continued spread of avian flu has, in particular, elicited a high level of concern worldwide, and Taiwan is acting with extreme caution in facing this situation. It is imperative and, above all, in the interest of all nations that Taiwan be fully incorporated into the global disease prevention system.
Just a few days ago, on the 15th of May, Taiwan's CDC announced voluntary early compliance with the International Health Regulations 2005, as we want to shoulder our duty as world citizens by complying with international standards. Even though Taiwan still remains excluded from the global disease prevention network, we insist on applying the highest standards to ourselves. We also hope other countries, particularly China, can follow suit, and become more open and transparent in disclosing their disease information.
We understand the reality of international politics, and it is for this reason and with humility and sincerity that we seek observer status in the WHA rather than formal membership in the WHO. This avoids disputes concerning sovereignty and politics, and seeks to minimize the trouble it could cause to those allies supporting us. Although the United States and Japan both adhere to the so-called one-China policy, out of professional considerations relating to health and disease prevention, they support Taiwan's gaining observer status at the WHA. This line of thinking provides a worthy reference for EU member governments.
In addition, this year, we have adopted the pragmatic stance of seeking meaningful participation in the WHO. This includes participation in GOARN, WHO technical meetings and regional activities, and the International Health Regulations (IHR) mechanism. This is based on practical needs in health and disease prevention and is entirely independent of political considerations. Our appeal has already received positive feedback from a number of countries, to which we wish to express our gratitude. We hope that our friends in Europe can also continue to extend their full support.
In three days, Taiwan will be knocking on the WHO's door for the 10th time. All eyes will be focused on whether our efforts will succeed this year. The result is important, of course, but our efforts are no less meaningful if, during the course of the appeal, the global community can come to better understand the unfair and unreasonable treatment that Taiwan's people receive in the world arena, and if we can make more friends and win greater support.
As for the issue of cross-strait peace that is of concern to all, I must point out that the biggest threat to the status quo comes from totalitarian China, as the Chinese Communist Party regime attempts to invade and annex democratic Taiwan through military force and other non-peaceful means. Lasting peace in the Taiwan Strait is not only the heartfelt aspiration of Taiwan's people but also the unanimous expectation of the international community.
The last thing Taiwan's people want is to see war erupt in the Taiwan Strait and to feud with the broad masses of China's people. In terms of regional stability and peace, by no means is Taiwan a troublemaker but, rather, is the country most committed to safeguarding and defending the peaceful status quo in the Taiwan Strait.
China, on the contrary, has conducted a series of military exercises specifically targeted at Taiwan, in addition to engaging in large-scale military expansion over recent years. Internationally, China has unceasingly tried to distort and discredit Taiwan's various efforts to consolidate and strengthen its democracy. These include our direct presidential elections, legislation for and implementation of national referendums, decision that the National Unification Council should cease to function, and proposals for constitutional reengineering. China purposely twists these as being nothing short of movements towards de jure Taiwan independence or war.
This is the exact opposite of the truth. These important political programs are all aimed at returning powers to the people, with whom they originally resided. No individual person or political party has the right to set preconditions or conclusions regarding Taiwan's future. Only the 23 million people of Taiwan have the right to decide the future of Taiwan.
Europe has long been a cradle of civilized progress and democratic constitutional government. The European Union's efforts to safeguard peace, human rights, prosperity, and progress in Europe over the last half-century represent a significant undertaking and important example unprecedented in the political history of the 20th century.
Taiwan and the European Union are partners sharing the same values of freedom, democracy, and human rights. I hope that Taiwan and the European Union can develop ever-closer relations in the future, and that we can enhance contacts and exchanges among our peoples. I hope also that, through our mutual efforts, we can work together to create a freer, more democratic, and more peaceful world.
Finally, I would like once again to thank the chairperson and all the participants. I now look forward to hearing the observations and questions from our distinguished guests. Thank you very much.
Discussion between President Chen and Dr. Philippe Régnier, Director of the Centre for Asian Studies at the University of Geneva
Q1. In terms of cross-strait relations, would it be possible for Taiwan to develop relations with China under the model of a confederation similar to that of the Canton and Republic of Geneva without the need to formally declare independence? And, without affecting the status quo between China, the United States, and Taiwan, how would the Swiss--or other--type of confederation model apply to Taiwan's constitutional re-engineering project?
A: Thank you very much, Dr. Régnier, for your questions and thank you also for your affirmation and praise of Taiwan's achievements. We feel the weight of responsibility, and will continue in our efforts.
We understand clearly that the Republic of Geneva is part of the Swiss Confederation now but, for centuries, it had been independent. As to whether such a model could apply to Taiwan-China relations, I have stated many times that the future of Taiwan, and of relations across the strait, may take any form whatsoever as long as it comes with the assent of the 23 million people of Taiwan. For the past half-century, there has, indeed, been one China--a totalitarian China--and, across the strait, there has been a democratic Taiwan. And this remains the status quo: that there is one totalitarian China and one democratic Taiwan. Neither side exercises jurisdiction over the other. They are two different countries. Although Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations, nor a formal member of the WHO, and even though only a small number of countries officially recognize Taiwan, this does not affect the reality and the status quo, which is that Taiwan is a sovereign country. We hold nothing against China, nor do we view the 1.3 billion people of China as enemies. What we strongly oppose is a totalitarian China, and the one-party rule of the Chinese Communist Party. Not long ago, when I was interviewed by Le Figaro, I stated that, as long as five conditions are met, then perhaps the 23 million people of Taiwan would reconsider their ideas about the future of Taiwan. The first of these is that China must abandon totalitarian rule under the Chinese Communist Party; second; China must implement a system composed of genuine democracy, freedom, and respect for human rights; third, China must cease to oppress Taiwan, including its oppression in the international arena of Taiwan's participation in the WHO; fourth, China must give up on its attempts to use force against Taiwan, withdraw the missiles it has targeted at Taiwan, and repeal the so-called anti-separation law; and fifth, China must respect the right of the 23 million people of Taiwan to make choices according to their free will. As long as China can fulfill these five conditions, then perhaps the people of Taiwan will be willing to change their minds concerning ultimate unification with China. In other words, no form of future relations with China can be excluded, so long as the 23 million people of Taiwan agree to it. We do not believe, however, that conditions are currently ripe for this, nor do we believe that Taiwan's people would now accept a confederation model. This is because China has repeatedly tried to belittle Taiwan, marginalize Taiwan, and treat Taiwan's government as a local government. It has refused to deal with Taiwan's democratically elected government, and it has tried to deny Taiwan's sovereignty.
Your second question was about our constitutional re-engineering project. On June 7, 2005, the 23 million people of Taiwan completed a very important stage of that project. The number of seats in our legislature was halved from 225 to 113, and a "single-district, two-vote" system was adopted. Moreover, legislators' terms were extended from three to four years and, more importantly, the National Assembly was abolished, making Taiwan's parliamentary system unicameral. In addition, the right of referendum was incorporated into Taiwan's Constitution. What I am saying, therefore, is that when seeing to make further constitutional reforms in the future we will continue to place great importance on acting in accordance with constitutional procedures. A revision to the Constitution or proposals concerning a new constitution must first reach two high thresholds. The first is that such revisions or proposals must garner the support of three-quarters of our legislators in order to pass. Moreover, they must be voted on and accepted by the 23 million people of Taiwan through a national referendum. Anyone who is familiar with Taiwan's political dynamics, especially the dynamics of our national legislature, will know that, at present, no political party enjoys a majority in our national legislature. So it seems unlikely that any political party could garner the three-fourths support needed. In order to reach this high threshold of three-fourths of the legislators, a consensus must be reached among the governing and opposition parties. Second, the threshold set for a national referendum for the 23 million people is very high. For a referendum to be accepted, it is not simply a matter of gaining the support of half the voters who actually vote but, rather, of more than half of all the people eligible to vote. Take as an example the 2004 election when the first-ever national referendum was held concurrently with the presidential election. At that time, there were about 16 million eligible voters. Roughly 80 percent of eligible voters cast their ballots, and more than half of this number voted for me, and thus I was re-elected. The referendum was not accepted, however, because it would need to garner the support of more than half of the 16 million eligible votes--8 million votes--whereas only 7 million people cast their votes in favor of the referendum. It is more difficult, therefore, for constitutional re-engineering to be completed via a national referendum than to be elected president. With regard to sensitive and complicated issues relating to sovereignty or changes of our national moniker and national territory, which have received a great deal of attention, it would be even more difficult to first garner the support of three-fourths of the legislators, and then the support of more than half of all eligible voters in a national referendum. Of course, we hope to have a new constitution that is timely, relevant, and viable, but this will only be possible when social conditions are ripe, legislators support it, and the people assent to it.
Discussion between President Chen and Mr. Konrad Szymanski, Polish Member of the European Parliament
Q3. What do you think about the EU model of integration--long-distance, treaty-based, delegated-sovereignty model of cooperation--as a model for future relations between Taiwan and China?
A: Confucius said that "If one has virtue, one will not lack friends." We are very grateful that so many people at the European Parliament have made friendly gestures toward Taiwan. Almost every year since 2002, the European Parliament has passed important resolutions in support of Taiwan's participation in the WHO. We are very grateful for the resolution that the European Parliament passed yesterday in support of Taiwan, especially its calling for the Director-General of the WHO to include Taiwan's Center for Disease Control (CDC) as a participant in Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network (GOARN).
We understand that China strongly opposes the inclusion of Taiwan's CDC, claiming that only sovereign countries recognized by the United Nations can gain access to GOARN. It says that Taiwan is neither a member of the United Nations nor a sovereign country and, therefore, does not qualify as a partner of GOARN. But we understand that the CDC of the United States, the Harvard School of Public Health, and the Joseph Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University are all partners of GOARN. The National Institute of Infectious Disease and Hokkaido University in Japan are also both part of the GOARN network, as are the National Center of Epidemiology and Population Health at the Australian National University and the Center for International Health at the Curtin University of Technology in Australia.
This clearly indicates that it is China that is trying to politicize this issue in all aspects, and we strongly believe that medical treatment and healthcare should transcend national boundaries, and the full membership of the United Nations--or even being a sovereign state--should not be prerequisites to being part of this global disease prevention network.
If the CDC of the United States can be part of the network of GOARN, why cannot Taiwan's CDC be included? Why can public health schools or other relevant research institutions of universities be part of the GOARN network, while the 23 million people of Taiwan are deprived of or restricted in access to their human right to health? This is totally unreasonable. We are very grateful to the European Parliament for its righteous voice, and to the good friends that we have in the European Parliament for voicing their just opinions.
We attach great importance to the EU model of integration. We believe that it could serve as a good reference for the future state of cross-strait relations. That is why I have emphasized again and again that we are willing to start negotiations on any issue with the Chinese government under the principles of sovereignty, democracy, parity, and peace. These four principles are those upon which integration of the European Union is based. First is the principle of sovereignty. The European Union respects, with no exception, the sovereignty of all its 25 member states. Second is the principle of democracy. During the process of EU integration, the free will of all EU member states was respected, and nothing was forced arbitrarily upon them. Third is the principle of parity. All 25 member states of the European Union stand on an equal footing. Fourth is the principle of peace. In the course of EU integration, there was no attempt to use force, violence, or any form of non-peaceful means. The model of EU integration can definitely serve, therefore, as a reference to what form political relations between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait may take. It is not Taiwan but, rather, China that is opposed to adopting an EU-style model of integration.
Discussion between President Chen and Dr. Kgosi Letlape, President of the World Medical Association
Q3. What do you mean by Taiwan's "meaningful participation in the WHA"? Is the WHO living up to expectations? Is there still room for improvement by the WHO or the World Medical Association? What other areas are worth our efforts for improvement?
A: On behalf of the government and 23 million people of Taiwan, I would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to the World Medical Association for its strong support of Taiwan's gaining observer status at the WHA, of Taiwan's meaningful participation in the WHO, and of Taiwan's participation and inclusion in the GOARN network.
As everyone knows and as I have just mentioned, China very often uses the excuse that because Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations and is not a sovereign state, Taiwan therefore cannot be part of GOARN. For the same reasons, Taiwan cannot obtain observer status in the WHA. We know, however, that the Sovereign Military Order of Malta and the Palestine Liberation Organization are not UN members, but how can they be observers at the WHA. Why, then, is the right to health of the 23 million people of Taiwan neglected, and why are they excluded?
We hope that, this time, the final result will be Taiwan's meaningful participation in the WHO. Taiwan's participation would not only be in line with the founding goals of the United Nations, but also would be a further step in the implementation of the "universal application" principle of the International Health Regulations. Moreover, the outbreak of SARS in 2003 and the recent spread of avian flu have made people around the world realize that there should not be any gaps in the global public health network.
Taiwan is located between Northeast and Southeast Asia, and is also a very important transportation hub for both people and goods in the Western Pacific region. Every year, 175,000 flights depart from or arrive in Taiwan, carrying more than 20 million passengers and more than 1.25 million tons of cargo. Taiwan, an island nation, occupies a very special geographic location in the world. Each year, more than 1.25 million migratory birds of 351 species either make stopovers or remain in Taiwan during the winter months. Given Taiwan's geographic proximity to China, interactions between people on both sides of the strait are very common. It was not surprising, therefore, that the SARS outbreak came to Taiwan from China three years ago. Moreover, from historical data covering the past four centuries, we understand that there have been at least twelve avian flu epidemics, of which, at least nine began in China. My administration consequently attaches great importance to the prevention of avian flu. I personally convened a high-ranking national security conference in August 2005 to discuss issues related to avian flu. Since then, we have convened two more national security conferences to discuss this important issue, which is to say, that the Taiwan government has upgraded the issue of avian flu epidemic prevention and control to the national security level.
Thanks to the joint efforts of Taiwan's government and people, Taiwan has not yet been affected by avian flu. Nevertheless, since we are geographically so close to China and since there are so many countries in Southeast Asia in which people have died from avian flu, we are under tremendous pressure, and we are extremely concerned. If the world does not let Taiwan participate normally in the global health network, this amounts to health discrimination against the people of Taiwan.
President Chen's responses to journalists' questions:
Q4. [Richard Werly, Political Editor, Le Temps, Geneva] Is it not now time for the United Nations to give democratic Taiwan a role in international human rights-related organizations? Can you tell us more about Taiwan's position on and efforts to further human rights issues? What are China's current human rights problems?
A: We have been working very hard to set up a nation built upon human rights, and we aspire to adopt and adhere to international standards. We are very gratified that, in terms of human rights indices and ratings, Taiwan has made considerable progress and seen significant results. For example, on May 3, World Press Freedom Day, the US-based Freedom House issued its report rating press freedoms in 194 countries around the world. Out of these 194 countries, Taiwan ranked 35th, and was, like countries of Europe and North America, designated a "free" country in terms of press freedom. Along with Japan, Taiwan ranked top in Asia. China, with its notorious record in human rights, ranked 177th, placing it among those countries that have the least free press in the world. In Taiwan, people enjoy complete political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and association, freedom of the press, and freedom to use the Internet. Our people enjoy complete religious freedom, and Falun Gong is protected by law in Taiwan. These freedoms do not exist in China, however. The European Union effected an arms embargo against China because of China's suppression of human rights following the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989. Now, 17 years later, have human rights improved in China? In fact, not only have they not improved, but China also uses force against its own people, and it threatens to use force against the 23 million people of Taiwan as a means of resolving cross-strait differences. We find it totally unthinkable that the Beijing authorities would completely ignore the right to health of Taiwan's 23 million people. Even if China ignores the Taiwanese people's right to health, the international community must have a sense of justice and, therefore, should not dance to China's tune. Nor should it behave in such a disappointing manner as to respond to China's pressure and discriminate against Taiwanese people's right to health. As I recall, one year during Taiwan's efforts to gain observership at the WHA, a Chinese official actually declared, "Who cares about you [Taiwan people]." Such a remark deeply hurt the feelings of our people. But never mind, even though Chinese officials ignore the 23 million people of Taiwan, we have friends like you who truly care about Taiwan. We are touched by your friendship and greatly admire you.
Q5. [Peter Kramer, Secretary-General of the Association of European Journalists] Do you plan to visit European countries or the European Parliament in the near future?
Q6. [Sari Rauber, Freelancer, Maariv of Tel Aviv] What do you think about the fact that the WHA is going to accept the Minster of Health of Hamas as the representative of that organization to participate in the WHA?
A: You need to ask China about this. Why does it want to suppress Taiwan so? Of course, you also need to ask some countries why they fear China so much. Everyone knows why Taiwan's journalists cannot obtain press permits to report from the WHA. And everyone knows that press freedom represents the consensus viewpoint of the international community and a universal value, and that it is also one of the ideals that the United Nations aspires to. Nevertheless, using the excuse that Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations, China pressures the WHA Secretariat to block press accreditation being issued to Taiwan's journalists. This deprives not only Taiwan's journalists of their press rights but also Taiwan's 23 million people of their right to information. Similarly, as Taiwan's leader, why is it that I do not enjoy the freedom to travel to Europe? This was particularly ironic when Liberal International conferred its 2001 Prize for Freedom on me, but I could not attend the award ceremony. I felt so honored to be awarded the Liberal International Prize for Freedom on behalf of Taiwan's 23 million people. Regrettably, however, I did not even have the freedom to receive the award in person.
Instead, I had to trouble my disabled, wheelchair-bound wife to travel from Taipei to the European Parliament in Strasburg to receive the award for me. I earnestly hope and anticipate, therefore, that one day I will have the opportunity to visit the European Parliament in person to pay my respect and gratitude to all my friends there.
I did once receive an invitation from a department of the European Parliament but was unable to make the trip, as the pertinent countries would not issue me with a visa. We are very grateful to the European Parliament for its long-term support for Taiwan and for giving our high-ranking officials the opportunity to travel to Europe. I hope that with our combined efforts, one day my dream will come true.
Concluding remarks by President Chen:
I would like to express my respect and gratitude to you. We hope that Taiwan can have meaningful participation in the WHO, but meaningful participation is certainly not enough. We want to participate in a dignified way, and that is why Ambassador Wu particularly mentioned the issue of dignified participation in the WHO using the name of Taiwan. Taiwan is the best name for us. It is also the most powerful name and the most beautiful name. In order to participate in the WHO or become an observer of the WHA, we have been working very hard in the last ten years. In the first eight years, we were not able to participate in any WHO-related technical meetings. But, in the last two years, we have been able to participate in 14 technical meetings. We are grateful that the WHO has opened up a window for Taiwan. But opening a single window is definitely not enough. We hope that the WHO can very soon have its door wide open to welcome the people of Taiwan for the sake of the health rights. We are very grateful to the United States, Japan, and many other countries for voting two years ago for Taiwan to become an observer of the WHA. The inclusion of the principle of universal application to the IHR last year has further increased the chances for Taiwan to participate in the WHO. This year, not only has the European Parliament once again extended its consistent support to us, but the European Union's administrative body has also paid close attention to this issue and has tried to assist us. Taiwan's meaningful participation has gradually come to represent the general consensus. I would like to express my gratitude for God's blessing of Taiwan. I certainly hope next time we can meet in person instead of through the trouble of using a videoconference link. Thank you very much.
Note: Should discrepancies exist, the Chinese version takes precedence.