President Chen Shui-bian today held an international video press conference with media professionals in Taipei and Geneva to discuss Taiwan's application for entry into the World Health Organization (WHO).
David Lee, Director-General of the Department of Public Affairs of the Office of the President, was the moderator in Taiwan, while Dr. Wu Shuh-min, President of the Foundation of Medical Professionals Alliance in Taiwan, moderated in Geneva. Other conference participants in Taipei included Secretary-General Chiou I-jen and Deputy Secretary-General Chen Chi-mai of the Office of the President; Health Minister Hou Sheng-mou; Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Yang Tzu-pao; Acting Minister of the Government Information Office William J.T. Yih; Professor Lee Ming-liang of the National Health Research Institutes of Taiwan. In Geneva, Secretary-General Peter Kramer of the Association of European Journalists; and other media professionals based in Geneva were among the attendees.
President Chen first delivered opening remarks, after which the floor was opened to questions from correspondents of various media organizations in Taipei and Geneva.
In his opening remarks, President Chen emphasized that China's suppression of Taiwan has led to its long-term exclusion from the WHO, making Taiwan the only gap in the global disease prevention system. He added that this exposes the 23 million people of Taiwan to the deadly threat of various novel communicable diseases, and stressed that the current situation is unfair, inhumane, and unjust.
The President pointed out that the dangers of an avian flu epidemic have evoked concern and apprehension across the globe. Being geographically proximate to China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos, Taiwan has frequent exchanges with these nations. If an epidemic were to hit Taiwan, it would rapidly spread to the rest of the world, which would have a very serious impact on global health security. Therefore, Taiwan must be granted full and effective participation in the global health system and be in close cooperation with all other nations, such that the health and security of every person in Taiwan and the world at large can be ensured.
As well, on behalf of the government and people of Taiwan, President Chen made a solemn protest against and condemnation of the inappropriate actions of the United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG), which first refused to accredit journalists from Taiwan, and then denied the legitimacy of their passports. The President expressed heartfelt gratitude to and the highest respect for the Association of European Journalists for speaking out in defense of the rights of Taiwan's media organizations. He said, "a sense of justice exists naturally in the heart of every person," and that the value of human life cannot be limited or despoiled by anyone. He went on to say that, although evil and power might appear victorious in the short term, people would never cease to insist on self-evident truths and justice.
President Chen's opening remarks
Secretary-General Chiu of the Presidential Office; Health Minister Hou; Former Health Minister Lee; Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Young; Acting Minister Yih of the Government Information Office; President Wu of the Foundation of Medical Professionals Alliance in Taiwan; Secretary-General Kramer of the Association of European Journalists; Friends from the Media in Taipei and Geneva:
Good Afternoon!
It is a great pleasure to have this opportunity to once again participate in a discussion with our friends in Taipei and Geneva simultaneously through today's videoconference. First of all, I would like to express my appreciation to each of you for attending and supporting this dialogue.
I remember that, around this time last year, I met with European opinion leaders, academics, and experts via videoconference to discuss how to best assist Taiwan's participation in the international community. In particular, we exchanged opinions extensively on how Taiwan might gain access to conferences and activities hosted by the World Health Organization. One year later, as we gather together again today to discuss health issues, we have decided to pursue new ideas and strategies, including taking the crucial step of formally requesting to become a WHO member under the name "Taiwan."
As all of you are well aware of, over the past ten years, we have endeavored to earn the right to participate in the WHO for the purpose of safeguarding the collective health rights of Taiwan's 23 million people. In order to achieve substantive participation in the WHO, we had previously chosen to bypass potential political disputes by accepting the concept of a "health entity," hoping that such an arrangement would in turn facilitate our becoming an observer to the World Health Assembly.
Although our diplomatic allies and other countries friendly to Taiwan like the US and Japan have lent solid support to our bid in recent years, our efforts to join the WHO have yielded little success due to China's staunch oppression. In recent times, the US, Japan, and some European countries have strengthened their support of us even further, hoping that Taiwan may be granted "meaningful participation" in WHO-related activities and meetings before it obtains observer status in the WHA.
However, according to the intelligence that we have collected recently, the memorandum of understanding that China and the WHO Secretariat signed in 2005 clearly states that, whenever Taiwan's medical or public health professionals want to join technical meetings or activities hosted by the WHO, they must send their applications to the WHO five weeks in advance. Upon receipt, the WHO is then to transfer these applications to China's Ministry of Health for approval.
The MOU also stipulates that representatives from Taiwan can only participate in these WHO conferences or activities in the capacity of an individual, and that no Taiwanese officials senior to the director-general level are permitted to attend. What's more, the memorandum calls for all conference documents from the Taiwanese representatives to be referred to as from "China, Taiwan."
The exposed MOU shows how China has managed to denigrate and suppress Taiwan in every possible way through political interference and maneuvering. This has left our endeavors to pursue "meaningful participation" in the WHO entirely meaningless.
When the SARS epidemic struck Taiwan four years ago, the global disease prevention network's rejection of Taiwan's 23 million people had a devastating consequence--the loss of numerous precious lives. In the early stages of the epidemic, due to China's callous interference and protests, the WHO had delayed dispatching medical experts to Taiwan to provide much needed assistance until six weeks after the initial outbreak of SARS here. During that brutal battle against SARS in Taiwan, 346 people became infected, among whom 73 lost their lives.
Disease prevention cannot allow any gaps and medical care heed no national border. SARS is an emerging infectious disease which no country has the capacity to deal with by itself. All nations must depend on cooperation under the aegis of the global disease prevention network to minimize the threat and damage from such an epidemic. The WHO was established precisely for this purpose. However, China's continued oppression has long excluded Taiwan from the WHO, turning Taiwan into the only gap in the global disease prevention network and exposing Taiwan's 23 million people to the constant threat of emerging epidemics. Its behavior is nothing less than unfair, inhuman, and unjust.
Recently, the spread of the avian flu has been a cause of serious concern among many nations. WHO statistics reveal that, as of the end of this March, 230 human cases of the H5N1 virus had been confirmed in six countries, including China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos. Of them, 144 ended in death, indicating that the mortality rate of the virus has reached about 62 percent.
As Taiwan is geographically close to these six countries, we have frequent exchanges and interactions with them, including 1,183 flights operating between Taiwan and these countries every week. In addition, as the Taipei Flight Information Region covers 13 major international air routes, it is estimated that every year nearly 200,000 flights arrive at or depart from Taiwan, and up to 25 million international or domestic passengers enter or exit our country.
What these statistics plainly reveal to us is that, were any epidemic to break out in Taiwan, it would spread to many places in the world in a short period of time. This would be a heavy blow to the health and safety of everyone around the globe. Taiwan needs to be able to comprehensively and effectively participate in the international public health network and collaborate closely with other nations, before we can safeguard the health and safety of every individual in every country around the world, including Taiwan.
Today, three survivors of the SARS epidemic have arrived at Geneva as the living testimony to the unfair treatment Taiwan received during the outbreak four years ago. We hope that, as they share with you first-hand accounts of their struggles with SARS, the international community may get a clearer picture of the unfair treatment that we have been subject to and recognize the potential threat caused by leaving Taiwan as the sole gap in the world disease prevention network.
It is our unwavering belief that only when the WHO closes the gap in the global disease prevention network by accepting Taiwan as a member can the health and lives of Taiwan's 23 million people and the citizens of all WHO Member States be fully protected.
On April 11, I sent a letter to WHO Director-General Margaret Chan, requesting to let us become a WHO member under the name "Taiwan." However, the WHO Secretariat rejected the request, stating that Taiwan is not a sovereign state and, therefore, ineligible for WHO membership.
However, according to the WHO Constitution and WHA Rules of Procedure, the WHO Secretariat has no authority to rule on whether Taiwan is a sovereign state or whether Taiwan is eligible for WHO membership. The truth of the matter must be judged by all WHO members.
When East Germany applied to become a WHO member in 1968, the issue of whether it was a sovereign state immediately came under question. Nevertheless, the then WHO director-general circulated its application document among WHO members and placed its application on the WHA agenda. He then stated that it was up to WHO members to decide whether East Germany should be granted WHO membership.
Although East Germany's membership bid was unsuccessful from 1968 to 1971, the WHO director-general acted in line with WHA Rules of Procedure by inviting East Germany to be an observer to the WHA in 1972. At the 1973 WHA conference, WHO members finally approved East Germany's application for membership.
We earnestly hope that Director-General Chan and the WHO Secretariat can process our application fairly and justly by putting it on the WHA agenda for discussion. We would also like to appeal to all WHO members, particularly EU countries, to show empathy for our cause and actively cite the East German example to let Taiwan be granted WHO membership in the shortest time possible. Moreover, we urge the members to help Taiwan participate in the WHA by granting us observership until we can become a full WHO member.
Since 2004, the UN Office in Geneva has repeatedly rejected the applications from Taiwanese journalists for press credentials to cover the WHA. This year was no different. However, it gave the unbelievable excuse that Taiwanese passports are "not acceptable." Such a gesture has not only gravely belittled press freedom, but also ultimately deprived Taiwan's 23 million people of their right to freedom of movement. No country in the world, regardless of the existence or absence of its diplomatic relations with Taiwan, has ever rejected a Taiwanese passport.
The UN Office in Geneva at first denied the Taiwan press's right to cover the WHA, and then rejected the legitimacy of passports held by the people of Taiwan. On behalf of the people and government of Taiwan, I would like to take this occasion to protest, most solemnly and strongly, and condemn such inappropriate actions carried out by the UN Office in Geneva.
Meanwhile, I would like to take this opportunity to express our heartfelt gratitude to and respect for Secretary-General Kramer and all members of the Association of European Journalists. Spurred by a sense of justice, over these years you have voiced support of the right of Taiwanese reporters to cover the WHA.
We have a saying that goes, "The human heart can always tell right from wrong." We firmly believe that no one can diminish or take away the value of human life. Therefore, we are convinced that, although evil and authoritarian repression may flourish now, our insistence on fairness and justice will never falter and will surely prevail in the end. I would like to invite you to join hands with us in the pursuit of a more healthy, beautiful, and auspicious future. Thank you!
The following is the full text of the Q&A session of the press conference.
Q1. Jean-Paul Hoareau de Montrose, Deutsche Welle:
I've just listened to your speech, and I think the big problem is that this struggle to get accession to the WHO is a difficult struggle for your country. But in the meantime, you are doing a lot of actions in the field, I know, for example, on the African continent. Don't you think that you are not commenting enough on what you are doing for poor people in the world? Maybe, by doing so, by letting people know what you do, this will help countries to give you a hand to get access.
And my second question is that, you are a member of the WTO, and you are not using this membership to let the world know what you can do to promote trade. These are my two questions. Thank you.
A1: Thank you very much for your question. Actually, as a member of the global village and a nation where advanced medical care is readily available, we, the government and people of Taiwan, have consistently fulfilled our international obligations and responsibilities in this area, and have never lagged behind in providing assistance to countries lacking in medical resources. This includes stationing medical missions in countries in need; sending mobile missions abroad; donating medical equipment and facilities; and training medical personnel. Currently, Taiwan has long-term medical missions stationed in Malawi, Burkina Faso, São Tomé and Príncipe, and the Marshall Islands. We are also discussing a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on medical cooperation with Swaziland, where we will station a medical team in the future.
In addition to long-term medical missions, Taiwan routinely sends medical teams for short periods to Haiti and Guatemala in the Americas, Fiji and the Marshall Islands in the South Pacific, and Kenya in Africa. We will be sending a further 32 mobile missions to set up free clinics in Latin American and Asia-Pacific countries.
In March last year, we established Taiwan International Health Action (TaiwanIHA) to coordinate medical resources for assisting countries in need. In cooperation with National Taiwan University Hospital, TaiwanIHA has set up a platform for donating medical equipment. Under this plan, secondhand but usable medical equipment from Taiwan's medical institutions will be overhauled as needed and donated to countries in need.
As many people know, Taiwan has always been ready to provide emergency medical relief where it is needed. For example, we actively participated in relief work following the South Asian tsunami in 2004, the cholera epidemic in São Tomé and Príncipe in 2005, earthquakes in Indonesia and the Philippines in 2006, and the rift valley fever outbreak in Kenya this year. Conservative estimates value the international medical, emergency, and humanitarian relief provided by Taiwan's public and private sectors at more than US$450 million over the past ten years.
Taiwan has also provided substantial assistance to other countries in avian flu control. In July 2005, for example, we donated 600,000 capsules of Tamiflu to Vietnam. During April and June of 2006, we sent medical experts to assist Burkino Faso, Indonesia, and Chad in avian flu control. For countries lacking in medical resources, Taiwan has purchased 79 BTLs [Blue Trunk Library] from the WHO and donated them to 19 countries where medical information is not easily accessible to help local medical personnel acquire professional knowledge.
Of course, we will not rest on our laurels, but will continue to work hard. We want the entire world to witness the efforts and contributions that Taiwan has made to the global healthcare and disease control system.
Q2. Wen Gui-hsiang, Central News Agency, Taiwan [Translation from Chinese]:
This is the last year of your presidency. Why is it that you are applying for UN and WHO membership under the name "Taiwan" at this time? In the past seven years, you have honored the "four noes plus one" pledge to the United States and the international community. Recently, however, the director of the Taipei Office of the American Institute in Taiwan said that Taiwan had made the "four noes plus one" pledge on its own initiative, and not at the direction or request of the United States. In other words, honoring this pledge to the US over the past seven years not only has not led to a resumption of cross-strait dialogue, but has actually led to greater suppression of Taiwan in the international arena. I would like to ask, does this represent a diplomatic setback for Taiwan? Have we misjudged the international situation? Or have we been misled by the United States?
A2: This year, we have applied for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan." This has nothing to do with the "four noes" pledge. That pledge was made in light of the times and there were many difficulties that could not be avoided back then. But the precondition to the "four noes" being honored is that China has no intention of using military force against Taiwan. There is absolute clarity on this point.
In recent years, however, we have seen China deploying missiles aimed at Taiwan and refusing to renounce the use of force against us. Moreover, China has formulated three-stage preparations for a war against Taiwan. The missiles deployed on China's southeastern coast targeted at Taiwan have increased from about 200 in the year 2000 to 988 today, with the number continuing to increase at a rate of 120 to 150 each year.
It is also clear that the "four noes" pledge had no effect on our push for national referenda. In the past, referenda were considered to be a political taboo, described as a major catastrophe, and even equated with war. However, we have successfully passed a referendum law, held the first-ever national referendum in our history, and in 2005, incorporated the right of referendum into our Constitution. Last year, we caused the National Unification Council to cease to function and the Guidelines for National Unification to cease to apply. The "four noes" have not hampered Taiwan's efforts to become a normal country in any way.
Of course, some people may ask why we are seeking to join the WHO under the name "Taiwan" this year. As we know, over the past decade Taiwan has adopted a very low profile [with regard to entering the WHO]. Our approach has been humble and we have made many concessions. However, this low profile has failed to help us achieve anything. For example, we sought to apply for observership in the World Health Assembly (WHA) as a "health entity" with no mention of the name "Taiwan." But even when we applied for observer status as a health entity, rather than seeking full membership, we still failed.
Over the years, many countries have assured us that they would support Taiwan's participation in the WHO and observership in the WHA. But now, ten years have passed and we have still not been able to attain our goal. Several nations friendly to Taiwan have shown a lot of goodwill and tried very hard to help us. They thought that if Taiwan could not become an observer in the WHA, then it should at least be granted "meaningful participation" in WHO meetings and relevant activities.
Such a proposal was made in 2005 and we were very grateful. Who could have predicted that this proposal for Taiwan's meaningful participation would result in China signing a secret MOU with the WHO in May 2005 that eventually led to our being totally deceived? As I have mentioned previously, this MOU signed by the WHO and China belittles Taiwan to the extent that, not only do applications to attend WHO technical meetings by our health experts have to be filed five weeks in advance, which is the lighter blow, but their applications also have to be reviewed and approved of by China's Ministry of Health! This MOU also downgrades our status to "Taiwan, China"--thereby treating Taiwan as a part of China, a local government under the People's Republic of China!
This is absolutely unacceptable. We must expose the truth behind this matter and let the world know that despite the good intentions of many, China has deceived us all. The WHO Secretariat itself has withheld the truth from us. We must be vigilant here and not allow ourselves to be cheated and deceived any longer.
Because of this, it is right that we forthrightly apply for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan." According to the WHA's Rules of Procedure, if we apply for WHO membership, the WHO Secretariat must abide by WHA procedures and invite the applicant, Taiwan, to become an observer in the WHA. This policy change and resolution [to apply under the name "Taiwan"] are certain to win unanimous support from the 23 million people of Taiwan.
Today, we are very happy to announce an unprecedented development in Taiwan. We all know that Taiwan's parliament, the Legislative Yuan, is divided on many issues. Very rarely are the legislative caucuses of the governing and opposition parties in unanimous agreement. In order to safeguard the health rights of Taiwan's 23 million people, I have written a letter to the WHO, in the capacity of president and on behalf of Taiwan, to formally apply for membership. To enable the government to act in accordance with popular will to resolutely promote WHO participation, we requested that the Legislative Yuan pass a resolution to give its full support to the government's efforts. The resolution received unanimous approval today, something that is very rare.
Taiwan's legislature is divided, sometimes extremely so, on a number of issues. However, when it comes to a basic health issue, to Taiwan's formal application for WHO membership, the more than 200 legislators of the governing and opposition parties have extended their unanimous support. We want the whole world to hear us. And we hope that our application this year will receive your full attention and support.
Q3. John Zarocostas, Washington Times:
I was wondering, Sir, what the situation is between the mainland and your country, concerning the strategic buildup. And do you feel comfortable that, given the military buildup by the People's Republic--in the form of increased maritime capabilities and 55 electric-diesel submarines--the power balance is tipping in the Strait? And do you feel comfortable that the United States is still a strategic guarantee of last resort? Thank you.
A3: Of course, the military strength on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait now leans toward China. When it comes to the number of submarines, China has at least 70 state-of-the-art submarines. However, we in Taiwan have only four submarines. Two of them, which we purchased recently, are over 20 years old and outmoded, while the other two are around 60 years old and completely obsolete.
Therefore, we hope to purchase submarines from the US. We are very grateful to the US government for agreeing to a military procurement plan in April 2001. Regrettably, this has not yet been endorsed by the Legislative Yuan. Nevertheless, we are making every effort to strengthen Taiwan's national defense and self-defense capabilities. We are all aware of the military threat Taiwan faces from China. Most notably, starting from the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989, China's national defense budget has seen double-digit growth for 18 consecutive years. The most recent defense budget saw an increase of 17.8 percent, with the final calculation of China's military expenditure last year showing an increase of 20 percent. These are concrete facts we simply cannot afford to overlook.
Thus, facing the military threat from China, we have no choice but to strengthen our self-defense capabilities. We do not intend to engage in an arms race with China, but only to increase our defense capabilities. Taiwan's defense strategy is based on the principles of "effective deterrence and resolute defense." Our strategy is defensive, not offensive. We will not initiate an attack, and our first move would only be made in self-defense. We are all clear on this point.
We want to thank the European Parliament for its resolutions demanding that China remove the missiles it has deployed on its southeastern coast targeted at Taiwan. It has also suggested that cross-strait issues and disputes and the future of Taiwan should be settled through dialogue and peaceful means.
Even though Taiwan cannot compete with China militarily, our democratic achievements are no doubt our most powerful TMD [theater missile defense] in facing China's military threat. We will continue to step up our efforts. We have three items of military procurement still awaiting approval by the Legislative Yuan, and we will continue to communicate with the opposition parties to make progress during this legislative session.
Q4. Kathrin Hille, Financial Times [Translation from Chinese]:
You just expressed your determination to defend Taiwan's sovereignty and take part in international affairs. In this case, however, the final decision lies with the WHO member states and Secretariat. The same applies to UN membership. So, can you further explain whether, before your term ends, you plan to take action in this direction--to strengthen your cards so as to defend Taiwan's sovereignty and make your voice heard without having to rely on others?
A4: It must be pointed out that, originally, we wanted to apply for WHA observership as a health entity to participate in the WHO. However, even this humble appeal was not respected and supported by the international community. Does Taiwan have to be recognized by China as a sovereign nation before it can be granted observer status in the WHA?
At present, the Order of Malta and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) are both WHA observers, yet they are not United Nations (UN) members. So why them but not Taiwan? We would like to help you understand why the international community has been so unfair to Taiwan's 23 million people. If the Order of Malta and the PLO can be WHA observers, why should the collective health rights of our 23 million people be denied? We talk about international parity and justice, but why is Taiwan treated differently? Is Taiwan not a part of the world? Are the people of Taiwan not citizens of the world? Why can Taiwan not be compared with the Order of Malta and the PLO? Why can we not enjoy the human right to health like other countries do? This is our appeal.
In the same light, the WHO Secretariat has initially refused to deal with our application for membership, which was proposed by myself on behalf of Taiwan's government and people. On April 9, I wrote a letter to WHO Director-General Margaret Chan, and it was signed for by her office two days later. This is a fact. Since the application was officially received and signed for, why was it then secretly returned with no response or explanation? My application letter was, in the end, simply jammed in the crack of the door of the Taiwan representative office in Geneva. Is such an action befitting of the WHO Secretariat? Why has the international community turned a deaf ear to this? I think it is very important that this is made public. Shouldn't an application letter that was already signed for be decided upon by all member states? Does the WHO Secretariat have the right to just jam my letter in the crack of the door of our representative office in Geneva? Where is everybody's sense of justice? I hope that everyone who believes in international justice and righteousness will speak out for Taiwan.
It is clear that the WHO Secretariat returned this official letter to us and said that Taiwan is not a sovereign nation. But it is not the Secretariat's place to decide unilaterally whether Taiwan is an independent sovereign nation. Rather, this matter should be turned over to all members of the WHO to decide. The WHO Constitution and WHA Rules of Procedure are very clear on this point. There must be no violation in this regard. The question of whether Taiwan is a sovereign state is not for the WHO Secretariat to determine.
Recently, The Economist published an article which spoke for Taiwan, saying that China's suppression of Taiwan is not only dangerous for, but also a humiliation of, Taiwan. It states, "In mid-April Margaret Chan, the WHO's director-general, who is from Hong Kong, defended the organization's refusal to consider Taiwan's membership by saying its policies are set by its 193 members who 'hold on very strongly to the "one-China" principle.' But this argument does not make sense. Not only does it ignore the 25 (24 at the time) countries that recognize Taiwan, it also assumes that members could not be persuaded to make an exception for an issue so important as public health." Director-General Chan is completely wrong, because 25 of the 193 WHO members have diplomatic ties with Taiwan. They all acknowledge that Taiwan is a sovereign state, not a part of China.
We believe that this should be taken seriously by the international community. We hope that you will speak up for Taiwan. It's not true that Taiwan is not recognized by the whole world. It is also not true that all countries hold to a "one China" principle. Taiwan is a sovereign state, and its sovereignty is in the hands of its 23 million people, not of China and its 1.3 billion people. Taiwan and China are two independent countries, with neither subject to the other's jurisdiction. Therefore, we have the right to participate in international organizations, especially the WHO. We hope our application will be taken seriously and discussed and debated by the international community according to the normal procedures for applying for membership.
Q5. Martin Banks, freelance journalist:
Just two quick points: Do you think that the EU and its member states have done all they can do to support your case, and if not, what more, specifically, can they do, bearing in mind the EU maintains its "one China" policy? And secondly, do you think it’ll take, you know, realistically, do you think it will take another major health outbreak for the international community to--as you seem to wish it to do--take this matter seriously?
A5: We do not want to have to wait for another health crisis to bring Taiwan to the world's attention, just so the world can realize that the health rights of the 23 million people of Taiwan deserve the same attention and protection [as those of people in other nations]. Just now I mentioned the 2003 SARS outbreak. Today, we are very concerned about the possibility of an avian influenza epidemic. As the president of Taiwan, I have made this a national security issue and have presided over a number of senior-level national security meetings to discuss the prevention of avian influenza and effective contingency measures. Between 2005 and 2006, we held three such meetings to discuss issues related to avian influenza. This has not happened in many countries in the world, but we have done so in Taiwan.
This shows that, here in Taiwan, the government and people pay as much attention to health issues, especially novel communicable diseases and other pressing public health issues, as other people do. Today, we are gratified that, due to our efforts in countering avian flu, no cases have yet been recorded in Taiwan. Our hard work has paid off.
In Europe, especially in the European Parliament, you have frequently passed resolutions over the years in support of Taiwan's participation in the WHO and of our becoming an observer at the WHA. Although the European Parliament's resolutions are merely advisory and not binding on European Union (EU) members, we recognize that the governments of EU countries are gradually beginning to pay attention to this issue.
We are also very grateful to the Association Belge des Syndicats Medicaux (Belgian Association of Medical Unions) and the Italian Helsinki Committee for calling for support for Taiwan's WHO bid. We are very touched by what you have done for us. As well, members of the parliaments in the UK and Belgium have made relevant proposals or passed similar resolutions showing support for Taiwan's participation in the WHO. On behalf of the 23 million people of Taiwan, I want to express our utmost respect and deepest gratitude to the governments and members of parliaments of these countries for your friendship.
We have always hoped that health issues can be separated from politics. We do not want to politicize health issues. The 23 million people of Taiwan are most certainly not orphans in the international community. The international community should not ignore the health of the 23 million people of Taiwan. We are human beings, too. We are citizens of this world as you are. We are members of the global village as well. In continental Europe, you uphold so strongly the ideals of freedom, democracy, human rights, and peace--especially human rights, and particularly health rights. Why has Taiwan been forgotten? Why has Taiwan been isolated? Why has Taiwan been refused? I want to again draw your attention to this fact. I believe that in the countries of continental Europe, which uphold democracy, freedom, and human rights, and which love peace, the governments and people will hear my call on behalf of the 23 million people of Taiwan. Our voice may be faint, but I hope it will be heard.
Q6. Li Yun-jen, Eastern Broadcasting Company, Taiwan [Translation from Chinese]:
You just mentioned separating health issues from politics. However, with Taiwan applying for membership under the name "Taiwan," many people feel that this has provoked China, and it seems that Margaret Chan has become WHO Director-General thanks to China's support. So, do you think Taiwan stands a chance of joining the WHO by using other names or other methods?
A6: Before we applied for membership under the name "Taiwan," we applied to become a WHA observer as a health entity. But were we accepted by China then? Did Chinese representatives in Geneva nod their assent? I clearly remember that, one year, the Chinese representative [Sha Zukang, then-Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the UNOG] in Geneva said [to Taiwanese reporters], "Who cares about you?" They humiliated Taiwan in this way, and looked down upon Taiwan and our 23 million people. Has China only been provoked today by our applying for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan"? Have they only begun to oppose our application today? Have they only begun to boycott Taiwan today? No matter what name or method Taiwan uses, do the leaders in Beijing care about the 23 million people in Taiwan? Are we just going to continue to be deceived? When [members of] the Kuomintang (KMT) attended a forum with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in China, did Chinese leader Hu Jintao ever stop or even reduce China's suppression of Taiwan?
We must remember that this year was the third year in which a KMT-CCP Forum has been held. In May of 2005, a month after the first KMT-CCP Forum was held, China and the WHO secretly signed an MOU. Just before signing the MOU, the Chinese authorities still claimed that they cared for Taiwan, that they cared about the health rights of the people of Taiwan, and that they cared about Taiwan's participation in the WHO. However, their actions belied their words. Today, for medical experts in Taiwan to participate in a technical meeting at the WHO, they need to file applications five weeks in advance and their applications have to be referred by the WHO Secretariat to the Ministry of Health in China for review and approval. They can only attend as individuals, not as representatives of Taiwan, and are sometimes belittled as being experts from "Taiwan, China."
Is this what resulted from the KMT-CCP Forums and the meetings between [former KMT Chairman] Lien Chan and Hu Jintao, which were claimed to have spoken and fought for the rights of Taiwan? Due to our ignorance, we were deceived in 2005. Do we want to be deceived again this year?
I want to thank the Legislative Yuan for passing the resolution to support my sending an official letter to the WHO on behalf of the government of Taiwan to officially apply for WHO membership. This is a rarely seen consensus between the governing and opposition parties. They have done the right thing and we must express our gratitude. Already, 95 percent of people in Taiwan support Taiwan's applying for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan." It is also the consensus and conclusion of all members of the Legislative Yuan, regardless of their party affiliation. This voice is 100-percent loud and clear. I hope that we will not belittle or lose faith in ourselves. Applying for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan" is definitely the right thing to do and the right path to take. We must insist on doing what is right and continue down the right path.
Q7. Claudine Girod, Radio France:
We understand very well that there is a lot in the name. But my question is, how long do you think it will take for the UN community to be willing to really discuss entire membership?
A7: If one respects the WHO Constitution and upholds the WHA Rules of Procedure, then, according to the rules of the game--according to the Rules of Procedure, when we file a formal application for membership, the WHO Secretariat is obligated to include this application on the WHA's agenda for deliberation.
Of course, we cannot realistically expect to become a WHO member on our first attempt. East Germany, for example, submitted its membership application in 1968, but it was only after six years of effort that it finally became a formal member. A year before it became a formal member, East Germany was invited to be an observer at the WHA. With East Germany having striven for six years, and this being only our first application, we only hope it can receive the international community's serious consideration.
Why are we taking this action? It is not only for the health rights of the 23 million people of Taiwan, but also for the sake of the entire global disease prevention network. There certainly should be no remaining gap in it due to Taiwan's absence, making us the only "black hole." This is for the common good of all, so there should be no discrimination.
Of course we hope to apply under the name "Taiwan." I must say, however, that in my letter it is very clearly written, "Chen Shui-bian, President of the Republic of China--parentheses--Taiwan." What is the significance of using the official stationery and envelope of the President of the Republic of China (Taiwan) to express our strong determination to participate in the WHO under the name "Taiwan"? It is that we have not changed the name of our country despite our desire to use the name "Taiwan," and therefore have not broken the "four noes" pledge.
Still, we believe that Taiwan is the name of our mother. It is also the name that everyone in the international community, including the 23 million people of Taiwan, is familiar with. It is the most beautiful name, the most powerful name, and the name that is most closely identified with this piece of land, the name closest to the hearts of the people.
Given that our official name, the Republic of China, cannot be changed nor used, what sort of name are we to use? We have no other choice, so of course we must use the name "Taiwan." We do not wish to use the name "Chinese Taipei" as we do to take part in the Olympic Games. Nor do we wish to use the very long name "the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu" under which we participate in the WTO. Our use of the name "Taiwan" does not involve any change in our national title and does not go against the "four noes" pledge, so there is no need for the international community to get worked up about it. Our use of the name "Taiwan" is just that simple, and there is therefore no need to sensationalize it or demean it. This is the name we find most satisfactory, and we hope that it can catch everyone's attention and win everyone's support.
Q8. Takao Tsuji, NHK
Three years ago, the Japanese government started to support Taiwan's participation at the WHA as an observer. The ruling party in Japan recently stated, however, that if Taiwan applies for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan," the Japanese government might not be able to support it. So I would like to ask you, Mr. President: Are you worried that this move might make it difficult for countries such as Japan, which have supported you in the past, to continue doing so?
A8: We want to thank the Japanese government's repeated expressions of support--be they private, public, or in official proceedings--for Taiwan's becoming an observer at the WHA. Most notably, in the 2004 WHA balloting--the only time the issue has been put to a vote--Japan, like the United States, voted "yes," [to our observership] even though it has no official diplomatic relations with us. For this, we are grateful. It is my understanding that the Japanese government's policy of supporting Taiwan's becoming a WHA observer and our meaningful participation in the WHO has in no way changed. Japan has always assured us of its willingness to continue providing such support.
Ten years have now passed. However, despite the support of Japan, the US, and our diplomatic allies, the WHO has still not accepted the proposal, and the WHA has still not invited us to become an observer. Actually, the WHO director-general has the discretionary authority to do this. If people are really serious--if they believe that Taiwan's becoming a WHA observer is important, then why isn't it possible for them to lobby and exert their influence on the WHO director-general, demanding that she take action and directly invite Taiwan to participate in the WHA as an observer?
Ten years have passed. Many years have gone by without being able to have this wish fulfilled. Are we to believe that the government of Japan is happy about this? Isn't it futile to go on like this? Year after year goes by, but can the health rights of Taiwan's 23 million people be put on hold? Can Taiwan's absence be allowed to go on and on? Can we afford to be the only gap [in the global disease prevention network]? We hope that the Japanese government and the international community will empathize with us. The 23 million people of Taiwan are human beings, too, just like the Japanese people. We should all be able to enjoy universal health rights.
This year, we are applying to become a WHO member under the name "Taiwan," which is of course, our ultimate goal. We understand that difficulties lie in the way and that it will not be easy, as there are some who believe that only UN member states or sovereign states are qualified for WHO membership [and that Taiwan has neither qualification]. Although Taiwan and Japan have no formal diplomatic ties, Taiwan's status as a sovereign state is absolutely undeniable. A state does not have to be a member of the UN to be sovereign. Several states have wanted to become observers at the WHA despite not being UN members.
Just now, I cited the examples of the Order of Malta and the PLO. They aren't UN members, either. Why can they do what Taiwan cannot? Why were they admitted as observers to the WHA but not Taiwan? Can it be solely because of China's opposition? Does China decide everything? Can China override the WHO Constitution? Can China override the WHA Rules of Procedure?
Once more, therefore, we call on the Japanese government and the international community to heed the health rights of the people of Taiwan. We hope that the Japanese government will continue to remain true to its principles and give us the greatest possible encouragement. And even if it cannot support our accession to the WHO under the name "Taiwan," we sincerely hope it will not oppose it.
Q9. Tsai Hui-jen, China Times, Taiwan [Translation from Chinese]:
You mentioned that we are applying for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan," and we also want to apply for UN membership under the name "Taiwan." At the same time, Democratic Progressive Party Chairman Yu Shyi-kun plans to propose a new resolution for "normalizing the country"at the upcoming DPP national convention to replace the "Resolution on the Future of Taiwan" [in the DPP Charter]. Do you think that such a resolution will raise suspicions in the international community that your push for membership in international organizations under the name "Taiwan" is a political ploy? And might this engender resistance to your further efforts? Or do you believe that Chairman Yu's move complements your current actions?
A9: Taiwan hopes to actively participate in the international community. We hope that we can join the WHO and the UN under the name "Taiwan." These are the goals of the DPP, Taiwan's ruling party. These are the consensuses of the DPP Central Standing Committee and are enshrined in the Resolution on Taiwan's Future. On these points, there can be no doubt. Mr. Frank Hsieh, who will be the DPP candidate in the 2008 presidential election, has also publicly and firmly advocated joining the UN under the name "Taiwan" in public venues, in debates, and at campaign rallies.
These are all hard facts, and these are the concrete consensuses of the DPP. We shall persevere, hoping to follow our application for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan" with an application to join the UN under the name "Taiwan." Already, we have launched a petition drive to conduct a consultative referendum on the DPP Central Standing Committee's resolution to apply for UN membership under the name "Taiwan." Once the required number of signatures has been reached in the initial stage of the drive, we will be able to take further steps through relevant agencies.
As for the resolution on "normalization of the country," we know that, come election time, different demands arise in response to campaign needs and in light of the times. Things like amending the party platform or party constitution and passing resolutions have happened several times in the past and are quite familiar.
So before [the election in] 2000, we passed the Resolution on Taiwan's Future on May 9, 1999. This resolution poses no problems, and one of its seven declarations calls for Taiwan to actively participate in international organizations. There is no conflict between that resolution and the current demands to join the WHO or the UN. There is no problem with any of the seven declarations and they contain nothing that needs to be changed.
Therefore, calls by some to repeal the Resolution on Taiwan's Future are problematic. Gradually, however, we've all realized that we needn't repeal the resolution because its seven declarations are highly valuable. Nevertheless, for the purpose of the 2008 presidential election, we have a different, new, supplementary, and strengthened resolution concerning the normalization of the country.
In fact, this is understandable and can be supported, but the new resolution must not be used to replace the 1999 Resolution on Taiwan's Future, just as the Resolution on Taiwan's Future replaced neither the platform's plank calling for a referendum on Taiwan independence nor Resolutions 417 and 1007. They all coexist.
These episodes, cases, and documents are all a part of the growth of the DPP. We place great importance on them and cherish them very much, and we hope that everyone may come to have a better understanding of them. We will not ignore the old in favor of the new. I personally agree on the need for a new resolution for 2008 entitled "Resolution on the Normalization of the Country." I strongly affirm it, look forward to it, and support it. It is right in every way!
Q10. Sitkei Levente, Magyar Nemzet, Hungary:
What was your reaction to the United States' recent objection toward placing missiles in the Strait? And along with that, the United States does not support the full membership of Taiwan in the WHO; don't you think that maybe you should find different ways to fight for your cause--you are a member of the International Football Federation under the name of "Taiwan."
A10: We can understand, and are completely clear about, the fundamental stance taken by the US government on this matter. The US government supports Taiwan to become an observer in the WHA but does not, at present, support Taiwan to become a member of the WHO. Nonetheless, Taiwan will continue to strive to achieve its goal, because participation in both the WHO and the UN is the right and obligation of the 23 million people of Taiwan. Moreover, we hope that the US government will pay due attention to the resolution passed unanimously earlier today in our Legislative Yuan, Taiwan's highest lawmaking body, to support Taiwan's bid to join the WHO under the name "Taiwan."
Whether the US supports us or not, we will not give up. We will keep striving toward our goal either way. We hope that by doing so, the international community will be able to hear the true voice of the 23 million people of Taiwan and that the WHO will grant Taiwan a seat. We urge the international community to give Taiwan a place in the WHO. If it is not possible for us to become a member, then what about observer status [would that be possible]? We were denied observer status, but allowed meaningful participation. But how can Taiwan have meaningful participation when the WHO has signed a secret MOU with China?
Therefore, this year, we have adopted a three-pronged approach by pushing for all three options. We hope that the international community will pay attention to this and support us. Once again, I call upon the international community to at least not oppose our bid even if it cannot support it.
I would also like to tell the government and our friends in the US that our applying under the name "Taiwan" does not involve a change in the name of our country, neither does it contradict our "four noes" pledge in any way. Let me ask you this: If applying for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan" represented a change in our nation's title and ran counter to the "four noes" pledge, would it have received the unanimous support of all parties and all legislators of differing ideologies in our Legislative Yuan? The result speaks for itself.
Taiwan is a new democracy. Among its people, there exists great disparity on the issue of national identity, with diametrically opposing views on the issue of unification versus independence. However, when it comes to the issue of participating in the WHO and whether we should apply for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan," everyone is in agreement. Our WHO bid transcends partisanship and the debate between independence and unification--it transcends all issues of ideology. Is this one voice not loud enough?
The US is a truly democratic nation that sets great store by the opinions of its people and, even more so, by the views and unanimous support of its Congress. Can it be right, therefore, to simply ignore a matter that has been approved unanimously by our Congress, the Legislative Yuan? Is it right to treat it as something meaningless? We are very grateful to the US for supporting Taiwan in the past in our efforts to gain observer status in the WHA and meaningful participation in the WHO. However, we must also remind our friends in the US that a whole decade has already passed and nothing has been achieved. How many more decades must we wait? Must we wait for another ten years? Can we afford to stop striving? Can we really afford to wait? Can we afford to deny the people of Taiwan their health rights for even a day? Can we be put on hold? We hope that the US government and our friends in the US will try to put themselves in our shoes and heed the true voice of the 23 million people in Taiwan, as well as the unanimous voice of our ruling and opposition parties.
Q11. Ralph Jennings, Reuters [Translation from Chinese]:
If Taiwan's application is once again denied next week, what new application methods or approaches might you consider? You have written several letters to the WHO Secretariat this year. How did they respond each time?
A11: We will continue our efforts. If we do not succeed this time, we will try again. If we do not achieve our goal in the first year, we will try again next year.
On April 9 this year, I sent a letter to WHO Director-General Chan for the first time, and received an acknowledgement of receipt from her office issued on April 11. I then wrote a second letter after discovering that my previous letter had been stuffed in the crack of the door [of the Taiwan representative office in Geneva]. Rather than giving up, I sent a second letter to Director-General Chan on April 18. In the letter, I made particular reference to my letter of April 9, enclosed the acknowledgement of receipt issued by her office, and asked why the letter had not been handled according to the WHA Rules of Procedure.
We also asked the charge d'affaires of the Permanent Mission of Belize to the UNOG--Belize being our diplomatic ally--and also the special envoys and representatives from several nations' missions to Geneva, to visit WHO Director-General Chan together. A letter written under the names of these countries, and to which a copy of my letter of April 9 and the acknowledgement of receipt was attached, was delivered to Director-General Chan. This letter, in which our diplomatic allies asked Director-General Chan to process Taiwan's application for WHO membership, was formally stamped as received by the WHO Secretariat on May 1. Meanwhile, we posted my second letter directly to the WHO Secretariat by double registered mail in Geneva, the receipt for which you can see here.
Still not feeling completely at ease, we then decided to write a third letter. The content of the third letter, which was sent to Director-General Chan on April 30, quoted the content of my April 18 letter, which had quoted the content of my April 9 letter. This third letter was sent directly to Geneva from Taiwan by international double registered mail. Once again, the receipt for this letter can be seen here.
Throwing my letter into the wastebasket will not be of any use, no matter how many times they do it. I want Director-General Chan to realize this--to realize that she has to deal with it. She cannot just keep putting it off in a way that suggests that Taiwan can be bullied easily. China once said, "Who cares about you?" Does the WHO Secretariat now intend to behave in the same way as Chinese officials by conveying the same message? Is this what they [the WHO] are going to do? Can they afford not to care?
We are talking about a piece of formal correspondence sent by the president of Taiwan on behalf of the nation's government and people. Can it just be stuffed in a door crack or thrown away? Can it just be ignored? One can choose to reject it for one reason or another, but first it must be processed, included in the agenda, and discussed.
Despite all of this, we will keep trying. We hope that the international community will pay due attention to our position. "If you are virtuous, you will not be lonely. You will always have friends." [from The Analects of Confucius] I quote this saying because we were very pleased to see The Economist article supporting Taiwan's participation in the WHO in a recent issue, the first appearance of such an article in the mainstream media this year. We feel gratified that people are at least taking notice of the issue. The Economist made particular reference to the MOU signed in May 2005 between China and the WHO Secretariat, and how the MOU discriminates against Taiwan. In the past, no one knew about our unfailing efforts and perseverance. We will continue to make steady efforts and persist. If we do not succeed this year, we will try again next year. We believe that our quest will become a national movement and a manifestation of the strength of Taiwan's people. We will keep up our efforts until we succeed. We have confidence.
Peter Kramer: Thank you, Mr. President. There are many questions. However, because of the constraints of time, one last question.
Q12. Liu Yung-hsiang, United Daily News, Taiwan [Translation from Chinese]:
Although Taiwan certainly has the right to WHO membership, in practical reality, the international arena is a ruthless place, which is why you just called upon Japan and the US for support. On this point, I'd like to ask you: You said that your "four noes" pledge was made against the background of a particular time and situation, and that to a certain extent, you had no alternative. If you were to offer advice to Taiwan's next president, would you suggest not to make any pledge so that he/she can be free of constraints and bravely forge ahead to realize "one China, one Taiwan" in the international community?
A12: Before being elected president, I had to take full stock of the international situation. Not only must we win the election, we also have to consider the aftereffects, including Taiwan's political stability, cross-strait relations, US-Taiwan issues, and the international situation. We had to think about these things in advance.
When we won the election, we could not just tear down the bridge that we'd crossed to get there. At the time, there were misgivings and unrest among the people, and so we made our choice for the sake of political stability and peace in the Taiwan Strait. If we had not made the "four noes" pledge, would the new administration under President George W. Bush have, in April 2001, approved of so many arms purchases in one package to maintain peace in the Taiwan Strait? Would they have supported Taiwan?
The same logic can be said for my situation seven years ago when I was running for president. Back then, there was a general buzz going around that, in order to prevent China from attacking Taiwan, the DPP should not be allowed to take power and I should not be allowed to become president. In 1996, China decided to test some of its missiles in our backyard, with one landing just 55 kilometers from our shore.
In the past seven years, we have been able to maintain at least a minimum level of peace across the strait, as well as cross-strait security and stability. Is this completely unrelated to the pledges and assurances I have made in the past? Likewise, these pledges and assurances did not hinder the consolidation and strengthening of Taiwan's democracy. We have been able to do what we needed to.
Just now, I mentioned that referenda should be held when needed. In three short years, we were able to bring about the Referendum Act, hold a peaceful referendum, and enshrine the right of referendum in our Constitution. We were even able to resolve the "plus one" issue in our "four noes plus one" pledge, thereby empowering Taiwan's 23 million people to truly utilize their sacred ballots and not be limited to the sole option of "ultimate unification." Otherwise, while people would have the right of referendum, they would still be bound by only one, final choice--that of "ultimate unification."
As for Taiwan's future and how cross-strait relations will develop, only the 23 million people of Taiwan--the masters of this land--can decide.
It has not just been about realizing the right of referendum, and then only giving the choice of "ultimate unification" with no other options, as that would not have been in the true spirit of referendum and definitely not in keeping with the true meaning or manifestation of popular sovereignty.
Therefore, by resolving the "plus one" issue--by causing the National Unification Council and the Guidelines for National Unification, which had dictated the "one China" and "ultimate unification" principles, to respectively cease to function and apply--Taiwan's consolidation and strengthening of democracy has been able to take another step forward, free from the constraints of the "four noes plus one" pledge.
In the same light, the "four noes" pledge will not have the slightest effect on Taiwan's bids for participation in the WHO and UN under the name "Taiwan." As long as we uphold our ideals and focus on our goal, as long as we remember that we are taking the correct step, then our perseverance will not be in vain.
Who could ever have imagined such a resolution being passed by the Legislative Yuan seven years ago? Who could ever have imagined a resolution to apply for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan" would be passed unanimously by our legislature? Would it have even been possible a year ago? But the resolution was passed. This is the result of our combined efforts. Therefore, we should not be discouraged or lose heart. Sometimes, we may feel weak. However, through our tireless efforts, we are bound to succeed eventually. Our success may be delayed, but it will come. I am very confident of this, and hope we can all encourage one another toward this end.
In the case of discrepancies between the Chinese and English texts, the Chinese takes precedence.