Well, what a surprise.....the KMT and presidential candidate Ma Ying-Jeou don't get human rights once again. In fact, it seems that they've never ever understood the concept of human rights.
They are currently fighting tooth and nail to keep the legacy of Taiwan's most notorious dictator enshrined in Taipei. This stupid Chiang-Kai Shek memorial is finally being disposed of by the DPP government, but of course Ma Ying-Jeou and Taipei KMT mayor Hau Lung-Bin are insistent that this monument to a cruel, terrible dictator stay.
In Germany, no one dares to commorate Hitler, as his human rights record and blatant destruction of Germany and persecution of the Jewish people are abhorred. Why then does the KMT want to honour Chiang Kai-Shek, who is basically the Hitler of Taiwan. How can the KMT claim to have reformed? How can they claim to respect human rights?
It is clear that anyone who values human rights must turn their backs on the stupid KMT and their backward ways. Ma Ying-Jeou can no longer claim to have learned lessons from the KMT's abhorrent past....
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Sunday, December 02, 2007
EU muss die Demokratie Taiwans unterstützen
Die Europäische Union sagt immer dass sie die Demokratie und Menschenrechte schätzt. Es ist dann widersprüchlich, wenn sie immer vor China katzbuckelt und dem "Ein-China Politik" nachgibt. Es ist sehr enttäuschend dass die Politiker Europas sich der Volksabstimmung Taiwans über UN-Mitgliedschaft entgegensetzten. Ihrer Widerstand gegen diese Volksabstimmung verrät ihren Widerwillen, die Demokratie in der Welt zu unterstützen.
Offentsichlich sind die Menschenrechte der Europäer sehr wichtig, aber die Rechte und Freiheit der Taiwaner nicht nötig. Die Politiker Europas soll sich schämen, als sie keine Tapferkeit haben, die Drohungen Chinas gegen Taiwan zu verurteilen. Sie haben auch keine Tapferkeit, eine gerechte Außenpolitik zu machen.
Offentsichlich sind die Menschenrechte der Europäer sehr wichtig, aber die Rechte und Freiheit der Taiwaner nicht nötig. Die Politiker Europas soll sich schämen, als sie keine Tapferkeit haben, die Drohungen Chinas gegen Taiwan zu verurteilen. Sie haben auch keine Tapferkeit, eine gerechte Außenpolitik zu machen.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Warum erkennt die Schweiz Taiwan nicht an?
Die Bundesverfassung der Schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft ist bereits vor acht Jahren angenommen worden. Man sollte sich deshalb fragen, warum die Schweiz noch ihre "ein China Politik" beibehält? Widerspricht diese Politik nicht den Grundsätzen, die in der Bundesverfassung der Schweiz deutlich aufgeführt sind?
Die Bundesverfassung fordert, dass die Außenpolitik der Schweiz "die Achtung der Menschenrechte und die Förderung der Demokratie" sowie "das friedliche Zusammenleben der Völker" unterstützt. Aber die "ein China Politik" unterwirft sich dem unvernünftigen Anspruch Chinas auf Taiwan als Teil seines Territoriums. Dieser Anspruch übt großen Druck auf die Menschenrechte und die Demokratie der Taiwaner aus, die täglich unter der Bedrohung von tausend Raketen auf chinesischer Seite leben müssen.
Taiwan, das die Freiheit und die Grundrechte seiner Bürger respektiert, ist wohl die schwungvollste Demokratie in Asien. Meinungsumfragen in Taiwan belegen, dass die Taiwaner eine Vereinigung mit China beharrlich ablehnen. Und wie kann man es auch nicht verstehen? Die Politik Chinas bedeutet das genaue Gegenteil zur demokratischen Gesellschaft, die sich die Taiwaner aufgebaut haben. China zerstört die Kultur Tibets, verfolgt unbarmherzig politische Dissidenten, und verhindert Demokratie und Meinungsfreiheit in Hongkong. Da ist es nur natürlich, dass die Taiwaner ihre Demokratie vor dem Einfluss China schützen wollen.
Wenn die Schweiz sich an ihre Bundesverfassung halten will, muss sie die "ein China Politik" aufheben. Sie muss unbedingt äußern, dass die Drohungen Chinas gegenüber Taiwan unannehmbar sind und Taiwan anerkennen. Die Schweiz muss sich den Ansprüchen Chinas entschlossen entgegensetzen und dabei die Integration Taiwans in die internationale Gemeinschaft unterstützen.
Die Neutralität der Schweiz ist eines ihrer politischen Aushängeschilder. Aber die "ein China Politik" zwingt die Schweiz Partei zu ergreifen. Stattdessen sollte die Schweiz lieber beide Länder anerkennen, entsprechend der Wirklichkeit. Taiwan und China sind zwei unabhängige Länder, und die Außenpolitik der Schweiz muss es auch so erkennen. Die Politiker der Schweiz müssen ihrer eigenen Bundesverfassung folgen, und die Demokratie unterstützen. Fordern die Schweizer Grundsätze das nicht auch?
Hanjo Lu und Dr. Stan Lai
Formosa Verein für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit
Die Bundesverfassung fordert, dass die Außenpolitik der Schweiz "die Achtung der Menschenrechte und die Förderung der Demokratie" sowie "das friedliche Zusammenleben der Völker" unterstützt. Aber die "ein China Politik" unterwirft sich dem unvernünftigen Anspruch Chinas auf Taiwan als Teil seines Territoriums. Dieser Anspruch übt großen Druck auf die Menschenrechte und die Demokratie der Taiwaner aus, die täglich unter der Bedrohung von tausend Raketen auf chinesischer Seite leben müssen.
Taiwan, das die Freiheit und die Grundrechte seiner Bürger respektiert, ist wohl die schwungvollste Demokratie in Asien. Meinungsumfragen in Taiwan belegen, dass die Taiwaner eine Vereinigung mit China beharrlich ablehnen. Und wie kann man es auch nicht verstehen? Die Politik Chinas bedeutet das genaue Gegenteil zur demokratischen Gesellschaft, die sich die Taiwaner aufgebaut haben. China zerstört die Kultur Tibets, verfolgt unbarmherzig politische Dissidenten, und verhindert Demokratie und Meinungsfreiheit in Hongkong. Da ist es nur natürlich, dass die Taiwaner ihre Demokratie vor dem Einfluss China schützen wollen.
Wenn die Schweiz sich an ihre Bundesverfassung halten will, muss sie die "ein China Politik" aufheben. Sie muss unbedingt äußern, dass die Drohungen Chinas gegenüber Taiwan unannehmbar sind und Taiwan anerkennen. Die Schweiz muss sich den Ansprüchen Chinas entschlossen entgegensetzen und dabei die Integration Taiwans in die internationale Gemeinschaft unterstützen.
Die Neutralität der Schweiz ist eines ihrer politischen Aushängeschilder. Aber die "ein China Politik" zwingt die Schweiz Partei zu ergreifen. Stattdessen sollte die Schweiz lieber beide Länder anerkennen, entsprechend der Wirklichkeit. Taiwan und China sind zwei unabhängige Länder, und die Außenpolitik der Schweiz muss es auch so erkennen. Die Politiker der Schweiz müssen ihrer eigenen Bundesverfassung folgen, und die Demokratie unterstützen. Fordern die Schweizer Grundsätze das nicht auch?
Hanjo Lu und Dr. Stan Lai
Formosa Verein für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit
Saturday, November 10, 2007
China-Europe Relations Get Complicated
Brookings Northeast Asia Commentary, May 2007
David Shambaugh, Professor and Director, China Policy Program, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies
_____
After a decade of rosy rhetoric and steadily improving ties, China-Europe relations entered a more complicated phase. While the relationship between China and Europe has developed remarkably quickly and broadly since 1995, it now seems that the relationship may be passing from the "honeymoon" phase into the "marriage" phase of the relationship. Both parties are beginning to realize the complexities of the relationship, the fact that they do not see many issues identically, that outside factors and actors contribute to shaping the relationship-but that mutual areas of common interest and cooperation remain substantial and dominant.
The release in October 2006 of the European Commission's latest official "Communication" on China, and the accompanying policy paper on EU-China trade and investment, signaled and made explicit many of the concerns about China that had been bubbling beneath the surface in Europe. In the Communication, for the first time in such a policy document, the European Commission made a number of requests of China.
* "open its markets and ensure fair market competition";
* "reduce and eliminate trade and non-tariff barriers";
* "level the [commercial] playing field";
* "fully implement WTO obligations";
* "better protect intellectual property rights";
* "end forced technology transfers";
* "stop granting prohibited subsidies";
* "work on clean energy technologies";
* "be a more active and responsible energy partner";
* "ensure balance in science and technology cooperation";
* "[recognize] the international responsibilities commensurate to its economic importance and role as a permanent member of the UN Security Council";
* "better protect human rights";
* "[ensure] more accountable government";
* be more "results oriented with higher quality exchanges and concrete results" in the human rights dialogue;
* ratify the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
* enter into formal dialogue with the EU and "improve transparency" concerning aid policies in Africa;
* "maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait";
* improve "transparency on military expenditures and objectives";
* "comply with all non-proliferation and disarmament treaties";
* "strengthen export controls of WMD-related materials".
This laundry list of requests gave the 2006 Communication a harder edge than any of its predecessors, but it also reflected the new sobriety in Europe concerning certain aspects of China's policies and behavior. The European Council ratified the Communication at its meeting on December 11, 2006, and produced its own 23-point list of observations and concerns about the relationship.
These documents took China's government and Europe Watchers by surprise. Both the tone and substance of the documents reflected a departure from the effusive rhetoric and lofty goals set forth in previous Communications, and led some notable Chinese Europe Watchers in Beijing to accuse Brussels of adopting confrontational or "containment" policies similar to what they sometimes perceive from the United States. Privately, Chinese Foreign Ministry officials apparently assured their official European counterparts that they "understood" European concerns and were not overly alarmed by the tone or the substance of the Communication. The Chinese decision to move ahead with negotiations on a new EU-PRC Partnership & Cooperation Agreement, and the warm reception given EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner in launching the negotiations in January 2007, are perhaps indicative of the more pragmatic official reaction. Nonetheless, the EU documents do reflect a change in tone, substance, and approach to China from past precedent.
Shaping the Future of Sino-European Relations
Looking to the future, what variables will likely shape EU policy towards China? Six sets of variables can be identified.
The first is the impact of trade on the European economies and workforce. With an EU trade deficit with China in excess of 150 billion in 2006 (total China-EU trade topped ?260 billion in 2006), high unemployment rates in several countries (especially France, Germany, and Italy), hollowed-out tertiary industries (particularly in the Mediterranean countries), and relative lack of competitiveness in the "New 12" Central European member states, European economies are increasingly feeling the "China factor." Thus far, it has not gotten the political traction that it has in the United States, but voices of concern and protectionism can be heard across the continent. European Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has publicly indicated, on a number of occasions, that these economic concerns can quickly snowball and possibly have a series of negative consequences-economically and politically.
The second variable is the degree of Chinese responsiveness to the numerous issues of concern noted in the 2006 Communication. These are not demands, but they are more than "markers." They are serious requests put forward by the European side, in the spirit of partnership, to advance the China-Europe relationship. To be sure, China has its requests too-notably lifting the arms embargo and granting of Market Economy Status-that the EU needs to take seriously and be responsive to.
The third variable concerns relations between the EU member states and the European Commission and Council, and between the European Parliament and the Commission/Council. Prior to the release of the 2006 Communication on China it was apparent that civil society, the China expert community, and NGOs in several member states were unsettled and discontent with the European Commission's ambitious and optimistic view of China. Many accused the Commission of being naïve. The manner in which the EU Commission and Council (mis)handled the arms embargo issue, creating an intra-European and transatlantic policy fiasco, only emboldened the critics of Brussels' China policy.
It seems that the European Commission seriously reflected on this subterranean discontent between 2004 and 2006, undertook a rethinking of the relationship and a reexamination of Europe's interests, and incorporated its findings in the new 2006 Communication. This, it would be assumed, will better position the Commission and Council with the member states, but also with voices heard in the European Parliament. As a result, China's "free ride" in Europe may be over.
A fourth factor that will shape Europe's policy towards, and relations with, China will be the pace and scope of internal reforms in China. The European Union has invested heavily-politically, financially, and rhetorically-in assisting China in a wide range of reforms. This has been the core of the EU's approach to China and what sets the EU apart from the United States and other nations in its dealings with China. The EU has viewed China primarily through the prism of a developing country and transitional nation-in the midst of multiple reforms aimed at marketizing the economy, globalizing the society, and pluralizing the polity. In these reforms, Europeans believe they have much to share with China-given their own histories as welfare states and, more recently, the transition from socialist systems in Central Europe. This orientation differs markedly from the American approach to the "rise of China" -as Americans tend to be exclusively concerned about the external manifestations of China's rise, while Europeans seem more concerned about its internal conditions.
Fifth, Europe now expects more from China in terms of contributing to global governance. This is made clear in the 2006 Communication. The EU welcomes China's recent contributions to UN peacekeeping operations (PKO), to UN reform, to non-proliferation, to resolving the North Korean nuclear crisis, and generally Beijing's new diplomatic activism. But, at the same time, the EU is deeply concerned about China's support for non-democratic states and its "value-free diplomacy" and "no strings attached" aid programs with such states, particularly in Africa and with Myanmar (Burma). Similarly, the EU is closely monitoring Beijing's worldwide quest for energy resources and raw materials. China may not yet be a global power, but it is increasingly a global actor. As such, Europe (and other nations) will be looking to Beijing to help address many of challenges and crises that afflict the international order.
The sixth variable affecting European policies towards China is the American factor and the new role that relations with China play in the transatlantic relationship. One positive side-effect of the arms embargo imbroglio has been that a greater appreciation of China-Europe relations began to take hold in the U.S. government and, concomitantly, a greater sensitivity and appreciation of U.S.-China relations and U.S. security commitments in East Asia developed in Brussels and other European capitals. As such, the "China factor" is now lodged more deeply in transatlantic relations. There now exists considerable consensus and broad agreement now between the U.S. and EU on a range of issues pertaining to China. It is apparent that the commonalities across the Atlantic concerning China far outweigh any differences.
Learning to Live with Complexity
The Sino-European relationship and "strategic partnership" remains an important one in world affairs and is, on the whole, a very positive one. Nonetheless, despite all the positives, it is also evident that the relationship has begun to emerge from its "honeymoon" phase. Thus far, none of these adjustments have been too wrenching, causing more minor tactical adaptations on both sides.
It is also evident that the changed-more sober-climate in relations since late last year comes primarily from the European side. In fact, when one reviews the rapid progress in relations over the 1995-2005 decade, it is evident that the EU had been the catalytic force in the relationship and played the role of ardent suitor. Brussels pursued Beijing more than vice versa. But, similarly, the lust seems to have begun to wear off more quickly on the European side. Going forward, the two sides will need to lower their expectations somewhat; clarify their rosy rhetoric; learn how to live with, narrow, or manage their differences; and develop the mechanisms to build a truly sustainable long-term marriage. Occasional frictions are to be expected, but the strong bonds and mutual interests will drive China and Europe closer and closer together over time.
David Shambaugh, Professor and Director, China Policy Program, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies
_____
After a decade of rosy rhetoric and steadily improving ties, China-Europe relations entered a more complicated phase. While the relationship between China and Europe has developed remarkably quickly and broadly since 1995, it now seems that the relationship may be passing from the "honeymoon" phase into the "marriage" phase of the relationship. Both parties are beginning to realize the complexities of the relationship, the fact that they do not see many issues identically, that outside factors and actors contribute to shaping the relationship-but that mutual areas of common interest and cooperation remain substantial and dominant.
The release in October 2006 of the European Commission's latest official "Communication" on China, and the accompanying policy paper on EU-China trade and investment, signaled and made explicit many of the concerns about China that had been bubbling beneath the surface in Europe. In the Communication, for the first time in such a policy document, the European Commission made a number of requests of China.
* "open its markets and ensure fair market competition";
* "reduce and eliminate trade and non-tariff barriers";
* "level the [commercial] playing field";
* "fully implement WTO obligations";
* "better protect intellectual property rights";
* "end forced technology transfers";
* "stop granting prohibited subsidies";
* "work on clean energy technologies";
* "be a more active and responsible energy partner";
* "ensure balance in science and technology cooperation";
* "[recognize] the international responsibilities commensurate to its economic importance and role as a permanent member of the UN Security Council";
* "better protect human rights";
* "[ensure] more accountable government";
* be more "results oriented with higher quality exchanges and concrete results" in the human rights dialogue;
* ratify the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
* enter into formal dialogue with the EU and "improve transparency" concerning aid policies in Africa;
* "maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait";
* improve "transparency on military expenditures and objectives";
* "comply with all non-proliferation and disarmament treaties";
* "strengthen export controls of WMD-related materials".
This laundry list of requests gave the 2006 Communication a harder edge than any of its predecessors, but it also reflected the new sobriety in Europe concerning certain aspects of China's policies and behavior. The European Council ratified the Communication at its meeting on December 11, 2006, and produced its own 23-point list of observations and concerns about the relationship.
These documents took China's government and Europe Watchers by surprise. Both the tone and substance of the documents reflected a departure from the effusive rhetoric and lofty goals set forth in previous Communications, and led some notable Chinese Europe Watchers in Beijing to accuse Brussels of adopting confrontational or "containment" policies similar to what they sometimes perceive from the United States. Privately, Chinese Foreign Ministry officials apparently assured their official European counterparts that they "understood" European concerns and were not overly alarmed by the tone or the substance of the Communication. The Chinese decision to move ahead with negotiations on a new EU-PRC Partnership & Cooperation Agreement, and the warm reception given EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner in launching the negotiations in January 2007, are perhaps indicative of the more pragmatic official reaction. Nonetheless, the EU documents do reflect a change in tone, substance, and approach to China from past precedent.
Shaping the Future of Sino-European Relations
Looking to the future, what variables will likely shape EU policy towards China? Six sets of variables can be identified.
The first is the impact of trade on the European economies and workforce. With an EU trade deficit with China in excess of 150 billion in 2006 (total China-EU trade topped ?260 billion in 2006), high unemployment rates in several countries (especially France, Germany, and Italy), hollowed-out tertiary industries (particularly in the Mediterranean countries), and relative lack of competitiveness in the "New 12" Central European member states, European economies are increasingly feeling the "China factor." Thus far, it has not gotten the political traction that it has in the United States, but voices of concern and protectionism can be heard across the continent. European Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has publicly indicated, on a number of occasions, that these economic concerns can quickly snowball and possibly have a series of negative consequences-economically and politically.
The second variable is the degree of Chinese responsiveness to the numerous issues of concern noted in the 2006 Communication. These are not demands, but they are more than "markers." They are serious requests put forward by the European side, in the spirit of partnership, to advance the China-Europe relationship. To be sure, China has its requests too-notably lifting the arms embargo and granting of Market Economy Status-that the EU needs to take seriously and be responsive to.
The third variable concerns relations between the EU member states and the European Commission and Council, and between the European Parliament and the Commission/Council. Prior to the release of the 2006 Communication on China it was apparent that civil society, the China expert community, and NGOs in several member states were unsettled and discontent with the European Commission's ambitious and optimistic view of China. Many accused the Commission of being naïve. The manner in which the EU Commission and Council (mis)handled the arms embargo issue, creating an intra-European and transatlantic policy fiasco, only emboldened the critics of Brussels' China policy.
It seems that the European Commission seriously reflected on this subterranean discontent between 2004 and 2006, undertook a rethinking of the relationship and a reexamination of Europe's interests, and incorporated its findings in the new 2006 Communication. This, it would be assumed, will better position the Commission and Council with the member states, but also with voices heard in the European Parliament. As a result, China's "free ride" in Europe may be over.
A fourth factor that will shape Europe's policy towards, and relations with, China will be the pace and scope of internal reforms in China. The European Union has invested heavily-politically, financially, and rhetorically-in assisting China in a wide range of reforms. This has been the core of the EU's approach to China and what sets the EU apart from the United States and other nations in its dealings with China. The EU has viewed China primarily through the prism of a developing country and transitional nation-in the midst of multiple reforms aimed at marketizing the economy, globalizing the society, and pluralizing the polity. In these reforms, Europeans believe they have much to share with China-given their own histories as welfare states and, more recently, the transition from socialist systems in Central Europe. This orientation differs markedly from the American approach to the "rise of China" -as Americans tend to be exclusively concerned about the external manifestations of China's rise, while Europeans seem more concerned about its internal conditions.
Fifth, Europe now expects more from China in terms of contributing to global governance. This is made clear in the 2006 Communication. The EU welcomes China's recent contributions to UN peacekeeping operations (PKO), to UN reform, to non-proliferation, to resolving the North Korean nuclear crisis, and generally Beijing's new diplomatic activism. But, at the same time, the EU is deeply concerned about China's support for non-democratic states and its "value-free diplomacy" and "no strings attached" aid programs with such states, particularly in Africa and with Myanmar (Burma). Similarly, the EU is closely monitoring Beijing's worldwide quest for energy resources and raw materials. China may not yet be a global power, but it is increasingly a global actor. As such, Europe (and other nations) will be looking to Beijing to help address many of challenges and crises that afflict the international order.
The sixth variable affecting European policies towards China is the American factor and the new role that relations with China play in the transatlantic relationship. One positive side-effect of the arms embargo imbroglio has been that a greater appreciation of China-Europe relations began to take hold in the U.S. government and, concomitantly, a greater sensitivity and appreciation of U.S.-China relations and U.S. security commitments in East Asia developed in Brussels and other European capitals. As such, the "China factor" is now lodged more deeply in transatlantic relations. There now exists considerable consensus and broad agreement now between the U.S. and EU on a range of issues pertaining to China. It is apparent that the commonalities across the Atlantic concerning China far outweigh any differences.
Learning to Live with Complexity
The Sino-European relationship and "strategic partnership" remains an important one in world affairs and is, on the whole, a very positive one. Nonetheless, despite all the positives, it is also evident that the relationship has begun to emerge from its "honeymoon" phase. Thus far, none of these adjustments have been too wrenching, causing more minor tactical adaptations on both sides.
It is also evident that the changed-more sober-climate in relations since late last year comes primarily from the European side. In fact, when one reviews the rapid progress in relations over the 1995-2005 decade, it is evident that the EU had been the catalytic force in the relationship and played the role of ardent suitor. Brussels pursued Beijing more than vice versa. But, similarly, the lust seems to have begun to wear off more quickly on the European side. Going forward, the two sides will need to lower their expectations somewhat; clarify their rosy rhetoric; learn how to live with, narrow, or manage their differences; and develop the mechanisms to build a truly sustainable long-term marriage. Occasional frictions are to be expected, but the strong bonds and mutual interests will drive China and Europe closer and closer together over time.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Honoring the Dalai Lama
(International Herald Tribune editorial published Oct. 18)
It is a given that whenever the Dalai Lama is honored in the West, China's Communist leaders lash out in fury. It happened when the Tibetan spiritual leader was received by German Chancellor Angela Merkel last month, and it happened again this week when the Dalai Lama was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal and was received by President George W. Bush. It is our hope that free nations will continue to defy China's faux indignation, and that by honoring the Dalai Lama they will add to pressures on Beijing to open serious talks about granting Tibet the autonomy he seeks for his people.
Since he fled Tibet, when China crushed an uprising there in 1959, the Dalai Lama, who is venerated as the 14th reincarnation of the spiritual leader of Tibet, has remained a powerful symbol of Tibet's resistance to China's suppression of its unique culture. In Beijing-speak, the Dalai Lama is a "splittist," someone out to split off a chunk of China. Zhang Qingli, the Chinese party boss in Tibet, denounced the Dalai Lama before the Communist Party's current National Congress as "a person who basely splits his motherland and doesn't even love his motherland."
The fact is that the Dalai Lama does love his motherland - Tibet - and is not trying to split it away from China. In intermittent talks with the Chinese, his envoys have made clear that they do not seek sovereignty, but rather a measure of cultural and religious autonomy.
We would like to think that the 72-year-old spiritual leader's life-long dedication to nonviolence, kindness, and tolerance might rub off on some of the people he meets in Washington. "Through violence, you may solve one problem, but you sow the seeds for another," is one of his statements that politicians in Washington might meditate upon. Or this: "The world has become so small that no nation can solve its problems alone, in isolation from others."
There's no reason to believe that Beijing would really imperil its relations with the United States or Europe over the Dalai Lama. In any case, China's new-found wealth is no reason to abet its colonization of Tibet. On the contrary, that wealth should give China's leaders the self-confidence and maturity to respect and encourage the uniqueness of this ancient land and the wisdom of its spiritual ruler.
It is a given that whenever the Dalai Lama is honored in the West, China's Communist leaders lash out in fury. It happened when the Tibetan spiritual leader was received by German Chancellor Angela Merkel last month, and it happened again this week when the Dalai Lama was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal and was received by President George W. Bush. It is our hope that free nations will continue to defy China's faux indignation, and that by honoring the Dalai Lama they will add to pressures on Beijing to open serious talks about granting Tibet the autonomy he seeks for his people.
Since he fled Tibet, when China crushed an uprising there in 1959, the Dalai Lama, who is venerated as the 14th reincarnation of the spiritual leader of Tibet, has remained a powerful symbol of Tibet's resistance to China's suppression of its unique culture. In Beijing-speak, the Dalai Lama is a "splittist," someone out to split off a chunk of China. Zhang Qingli, the Chinese party boss in Tibet, denounced the Dalai Lama before the Communist Party's current National Congress as "a person who basely splits his motherland and doesn't even love his motherland."
The fact is that the Dalai Lama does love his motherland - Tibet - and is not trying to split it away from China. In intermittent talks with the Chinese, his envoys have made clear that they do not seek sovereignty, but rather a measure of cultural and religious autonomy.
We would like to think that the 72-year-old spiritual leader's life-long dedication to nonviolence, kindness, and tolerance might rub off on some of the people he meets in Washington. "Through violence, you may solve one problem, but you sow the seeds for another," is one of his statements that politicians in Washington might meditate upon. Or this: "The world has become so small that no nation can solve its problems alone, in isolation from others."
There's no reason to believe that Beijing would really imperil its relations with the United States or Europe over the Dalai Lama. In any case, China's new-found wealth is no reason to abet its colonization of Tibet. On the contrary, that wealth should give China's leaders the self-confidence and maturity to respect and encourage the uniqueness of this ancient land and the wisdom of its spiritual ruler.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Freedom House Condemns U.S. Support of China on Taiwan UN Bid
Washington, D.C.
September 10, 2007
U.S. pressure on Taiwan to call off plans for a national referendum on applying for a seat at the United Nations is inconsistent with its commitment to the promotion of democracy and freedom, Freedom House said today.
The U.S. joined the People’s Republic of China in appealing to Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian not to hold a proposed referendum on whether Taiwan should continue to seek membership at the United Nations. Taiwan’s most recent application for a seat alongside China at the U.N. was rejected in July.
“The U.S., as one of Taiwan’s few strong allies, has made it clear that it wants to maintain the status quo and prevent a provocation of Chinese military action against Taiwan,” said Jennifer Windsor, executive director of Freedom House. “However, it has no business in joining with China to bully the Taiwanese people--who have demonstrated their commitment to democracy--away from peacefully expressing their desire to occupy a seat at the United Nations.”
“The message being sent by President Bush, first in accepting the invitation of Chinese President Hu Jintao to attend the Beijing Olympics, and now in joining China to suppress Taiwan’s democratic aspirations, is that the spread of democracy and freedom is not a priority when it offends a large powerful country,” she added.
Taiwan, which broke away from China in 1949, now boasts both strong democratic credentials and a vibrant economy. An electoral democracy, with a free press and strong civil liberties, Taiwan currently maintains the world’s 18th largest economy and is the 10th largest trading partner to the European Union. However, as a result of pressure by China, which considers Taiwan to be a part of its territory, only 24 nations currently recognize Taiwan as an independent country. The U.S. dropped its diplomatic recognition of Taiwan in 1979, when it established diplomatic relations with China, although it has remained a strong ally and has pledged to defend Taiwan from Chinese military intervention.
Taiwan has sent applications to join the United Nations for the past 15 years and has been denied each time. The proposed referendum on UN membership is slated for March 2008 to coincide with upcoming presidential elections.
Taiwan is rated Free in the 2007 edition of the organization’s annual survey, Freedom in the World, with a rating of 2 (on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 being best) for political rights and a 1 for civil liberties.
Freedom House is an independent nongovernmental organization that supports the expansion of freedom around the world.
September 10, 2007
U.S. pressure on Taiwan to call off plans for a national referendum on applying for a seat at the United Nations is inconsistent with its commitment to the promotion of democracy and freedom, Freedom House said today.
The U.S. joined the People’s Republic of China in appealing to Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian not to hold a proposed referendum on whether Taiwan should continue to seek membership at the United Nations. Taiwan’s most recent application for a seat alongside China at the U.N. was rejected in July.
“The U.S., as one of Taiwan’s few strong allies, has made it clear that it wants to maintain the status quo and prevent a provocation of Chinese military action against Taiwan,” said Jennifer Windsor, executive director of Freedom House. “However, it has no business in joining with China to bully the Taiwanese people--who have demonstrated their commitment to democracy--away from peacefully expressing their desire to occupy a seat at the United Nations.”
“The message being sent by President Bush, first in accepting the invitation of Chinese President Hu Jintao to attend the Beijing Olympics, and now in joining China to suppress Taiwan’s democratic aspirations, is that the spread of democracy and freedom is not a priority when it offends a large powerful country,” she added.
Taiwan, which broke away from China in 1949, now boasts both strong democratic credentials and a vibrant economy. An electoral democracy, with a free press and strong civil liberties, Taiwan currently maintains the world’s 18th largest economy and is the 10th largest trading partner to the European Union. However, as a result of pressure by China, which considers Taiwan to be a part of its territory, only 24 nations currently recognize Taiwan as an independent country. The U.S. dropped its diplomatic recognition of Taiwan in 1979, when it established diplomatic relations with China, although it has remained a strong ally and has pledged to defend Taiwan from Chinese military intervention.
Taiwan has sent applications to join the United Nations for the past 15 years and has been denied each time. The proposed referendum on UN membership is slated for March 2008 to coincide with upcoming presidential elections.
Taiwan is rated Free in the 2007 edition of the organization’s annual survey, Freedom in the World, with a rating of 2 (on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 being best) for political rights and a 1 for civil liberties.
Freedom House is an independent nongovernmental organization that supports the expansion of freedom around the world.
Monday, July 30, 2007
A-t-elle l'ONU aucune crédibilité?
Avec le rejet de la tentative de Taïwan de devenir membre de l'ONU, on peux se demander si l'ONU a aucune crédibilité. Quoique les états cruels comme le Corée du Nord sont les membres en pleine, et un pays comme le Zimbabwe a pris la présidence du comité pour développement durable de l'ONU, une démocratie vivante comme Taïwan qui respecte les droits de l'homme et la liberté de ses citoyens est traité comme un paria par l'ONU.
La charte des Nations Unies dit, que un but de, l'ONU est pour "développer entre les nations des relations amicales fondées sur le respect du principe de l'égalité de droits des peuples et de leur droit à disposer d'eux-mêmes." Mais l'ONU elle-même ne suit pas sa charte propre. On doit se demander que si l'ONU ne veut pas soutenir la démocratie, la liberté, et les droits de l'homme, pourquoi existe-elle encore?
La charte des Nations Unies dit, que un but de, l'ONU est pour "développer entre les nations des relations amicales fondées sur le respect du principe de l'égalité de droits des peuples et de leur droit à disposer d'eux-mêmes." Mais l'ONU elle-même ne suit pas sa charte propre. On doit se demander que si l'ONU ne veut pas soutenir la démocratie, la liberté, et les droits de l'homme, pourquoi existe-elle encore?
Thursday, July 19, 2007
FAPA Europa verurteilt die ablehnende Haltung der EU gegenüber der Demokratie
Zur sofortigen Veröffentlichung
Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2007, Freiburg, Deutschland – Der Formosa Verein für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit (FAPA Europa) hat die Europäische Union dafür verurteilt, ein in Taiwan geplantes demokratisches Referendum kritisiert zu haben. Einem Bericht der britischen Zeitschrift „Economist“ zufolge beabsichtigt die EU, Taiwan eine Warnung mit dem Hinweis zukommen zu lassen, ein Referendum in Verbindung mit den kommenden Präsidentschaftswahlen im Jahr 2008 sei „nicht hilfreich“. Ebenfalls heisst es, Chinesische Diplomaten sollen die EU zu diesem Schritt gedrängt haben.
„Es ist traurig und enttäuschend zugleich, zu sehen, dass die EU dazu bereit ist, sich der Chinesischen Diktatur zu unterwerfen und seine fundamentalen Wertvorstellungen der Demokratie und Freiheit dabei über Bord zu werfen.“ meinte Dr. Stan Lai, Pressesprecher von FAPA Europa. „Viele EU-Staaten machen Gebrauch von demokratischen Referenda, wieso also wird Taiwan kritisiert, wenn es dasselbe macht? Grenzt dies nicht an Heuchelei von Seiten der EU?“
Derzeit wird das demokratische Taiwan von 1000 Raketen, aufgestellt von der Volksrepublik China, bedroht. Obwohl Umfragen ergaben, dass eine gewaltige Mehrheit an Taiwanern eine Wiedervereinigung mit China ablehnt, besteht die Chinesische Regierung darauf, Taiwan weiterhin von der Internationalen Gemeinschaft zu isolieren. Die EU hat sich dazu entschlossen, dem Druck Chinas nachzugeben und Taiwan zu tadeln.
„Wenn der EU Menschenrechte und demokratische Entwicklungen etwas bedeuten, muss es Abstand von der Chinesischen Diktatur nehmen und Taiwans Demokratie unterstützen.“ fuhr Lai fort. „Sollte die EU-Politik nicht eher von Europäischen Werten als von Peking aus gesteuert werden?“
„Europäische Politiker müssen erkennen, dass die höchste Ebene internationaler Übereinkunft in Bezug auf den Status Taiwans auf dem Friedensvertrag von San Francisco beruht, und entsprechend dieses Vertrages hat China keinen Anspruch auf Taiwan“ erklärte Alison Hsieh, Forscherin für FAPA Europa. „Die EU muss das Recht auf Selbstbestimmung, wie es in der Verfassung der UN vorgeschrieben ist, respektieren.“
###
Über FAPA Europa:
FAPA Europa ist eine europäische Organisation die europäisch-taiwanesische Beziehungen fördert und das Recht Taiwans auf Selbstbestimmung unterstützt.
Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2007, Freiburg, Deutschland – Der Formosa Verein für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit (FAPA Europa) hat die Europäische Union dafür verurteilt, ein in Taiwan geplantes demokratisches Referendum kritisiert zu haben. Einem Bericht der britischen Zeitschrift „Economist“ zufolge beabsichtigt die EU, Taiwan eine Warnung mit dem Hinweis zukommen zu lassen, ein Referendum in Verbindung mit den kommenden Präsidentschaftswahlen im Jahr 2008 sei „nicht hilfreich“. Ebenfalls heisst es, Chinesische Diplomaten sollen die EU zu diesem Schritt gedrängt haben.
„Es ist traurig und enttäuschend zugleich, zu sehen, dass die EU dazu bereit ist, sich der Chinesischen Diktatur zu unterwerfen und seine fundamentalen Wertvorstellungen der Demokratie und Freiheit dabei über Bord zu werfen.“ meinte Dr. Stan Lai, Pressesprecher von FAPA Europa. „Viele EU-Staaten machen Gebrauch von demokratischen Referenda, wieso also wird Taiwan kritisiert, wenn es dasselbe macht? Grenzt dies nicht an Heuchelei von Seiten der EU?“
Derzeit wird das demokratische Taiwan von 1000 Raketen, aufgestellt von der Volksrepublik China, bedroht. Obwohl Umfragen ergaben, dass eine gewaltige Mehrheit an Taiwanern eine Wiedervereinigung mit China ablehnt, besteht die Chinesische Regierung darauf, Taiwan weiterhin von der Internationalen Gemeinschaft zu isolieren. Die EU hat sich dazu entschlossen, dem Druck Chinas nachzugeben und Taiwan zu tadeln.
„Wenn der EU Menschenrechte und demokratische Entwicklungen etwas bedeuten, muss es Abstand von der Chinesischen Diktatur nehmen und Taiwans Demokratie unterstützen.“ fuhr Lai fort. „Sollte die EU-Politik nicht eher von Europäischen Werten als von Peking aus gesteuert werden?“
„Europäische Politiker müssen erkennen, dass die höchste Ebene internationaler Übereinkunft in Bezug auf den Status Taiwans auf dem Friedensvertrag von San Francisco beruht, und entsprechend dieses Vertrages hat China keinen Anspruch auf Taiwan“ erklärte Alison Hsieh, Forscherin für FAPA Europa. „Die EU muss das Recht auf Selbstbestimmung, wie es in der Verfassung der UN vorgeschrieben ist, respektieren.“
###
Über FAPA Europa:
FAPA Europa ist eine europäische Organisation die europäisch-taiwanesische Beziehungen fördert und das Recht Taiwans auf Selbstbestimmung unterstützt.
L'AFAP Europe critique l'UE pour son refus de soutenir la démocratie
Pour diffusion immédiate
Jeudi, le 19 Juillet 2007, Fribourg, Allemagne - L'Association Formosane pour les Affaires Publiques (L'AFAP Europe) a critiqué le refus par l'Union Européenne de soutenir un référendum projeté qui sera tenu à Taïwan l'année prochaine. Selon un reportage de l'Economist, l'UE en train de rediger un avertissement, qui dira qu'un référendum démocratique à Taïwan ne serait pas utile. Le même reportage a expliqué que diplomates de la Chine ont fait la pression sur l'UE pour qu'elle s'oppose ce référendum.
"Il est vraiment triste et décevant que l'UE est disposé à dénoncer ses valeurs de démocratie et de liberté en s'inclinant devant la dictature chinoise," a remarqué Dr. Stan Lai, porte-parole pour l'AFAP Europe. "Si plusieurs états de l'UE ont eux-mêmes tenu des référendums, pourquoi veulent-ils empêcher Taïwan de faire la même chose? Ne revèlent-ils pas la hypocrise de l'UE par leur propos?"
Taïwan, une nation démocratique est menacé par plus de 1000 missiles qui sont déployés par la Chine. Même si les sondages sur Taïwan indiquent que la grande plupart de taïwanais rejette l'idée d'unification de la Chine, le gouvernement de la Chine s'obstine à isoler Taïwan de la communauté internationale. L'UE a choisi de s'incliner devant la Chine en brimant les droits de Taïwan.
"Si l'UE se sent concerné par le respect des droits de l'homme ou par la progression démocratique, il faut qu'elle arrêt sa complaisance politique avec la Chine, et commence à soutenir les droits de Taïwan," a ajouté Lai. "La politique étrangère de l'UE ne devrait-t-elle pas être construite d'après les valeurs européennes plutôt que être dictée par Pékin?"
"Les législateurs européens doivent reconnaître que, dans la situation actuelle, en ce qui concerne le statut légal de Taïwan, seul le Traité de Paix de San Francisco prévaut sur tout le reste. Et selon ce traité, la Chine n'a aucun droit légal pour réclamer Taïwan comme un territoire qui leur appartient", a indiqué Alison Hsieh, rechercheuse avancé à l'AFAP Europe. "L'Europe devrait respecter le droit à l'autodétermination comme il a été stipulé dans la charte des Nations Unis".
###
À propos de l'AFAP Europe:
L'AFAP Europe est une organisation européenne qui promouvoit les rélations européennes-taiwanaises et soutient la souverainété et le droit d'autodétermination de Taïwan.
Jeudi, le 19 Juillet 2007, Fribourg, Allemagne - L'Association Formosane pour les Affaires Publiques (L'AFAP Europe) a critiqué le refus par l'Union Européenne de soutenir un référendum projeté qui sera tenu à Taïwan l'année prochaine. Selon un reportage de l'Economist, l'UE en train de rediger un avertissement, qui dira qu'un référendum démocratique à Taïwan ne serait pas utile. Le même reportage a expliqué que diplomates de la Chine ont fait la pression sur l'UE pour qu'elle s'oppose ce référendum.
"Il est vraiment triste et décevant que l'UE est disposé à dénoncer ses valeurs de démocratie et de liberté en s'inclinant devant la dictature chinoise," a remarqué Dr. Stan Lai, porte-parole pour l'AFAP Europe. "Si plusieurs états de l'UE ont eux-mêmes tenu des référendums, pourquoi veulent-ils empêcher Taïwan de faire la même chose? Ne revèlent-ils pas la hypocrise de l'UE par leur propos?"
Taïwan, une nation démocratique est menacé par plus de 1000 missiles qui sont déployés par la Chine. Même si les sondages sur Taïwan indiquent que la grande plupart de taïwanais rejette l'idée d'unification de la Chine, le gouvernement de la Chine s'obstine à isoler Taïwan de la communauté internationale. L'UE a choisi de s'incliner devant la Chine en brimant les droits de Taïwan.
"Si l'UE se sent concerné par le respect des droits de l'homme ou par la progression démocratique, il faut qu'elle arrêt sa complaisance politique avec la Chine, et commence à soutenir les droits de Taïwan," a ajouté Lai. "La politique étrangère de l'UE ne devrait-t-elle pas être construite d'après les valeurs européennes plutôt que être dictée par Pékin?"
"Les législateurs européens doivent reconnaître que, dans la situation actuelle, en ce qui concerne le statut légal de Taïwan, seul le Traité de Paix de San Francisco prévaut sur tout le reste. Et selon ce traité, la Chine n'a aucun droit légal pour réclamer Taïwan comme un territoire qui leur appartient", a indiqué Alison Hsieh, rechercheuse avancé à l'AFAP Europe. "L'Europe devrait respecter le droit à l'autodétermination comme il a été stipulé dans la charte des Nations Unis".
###
À propos de l'AFAP Europe:
L'AFAP Europe est une organisation européenne qui promouvoit les rélations européennes-taiwanaises et soutient la souverainété et le droit d'autodétermination de Taïwan.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
20 years of freedom at risk
On July 15, Taiwan will commemorate the 20 year anniversary of the lifting of martial law. For many Taiwanese, the 38-year period of martial law imposed by the Kuomintang regime represents a sad, painful era in Taiwanese history. Freedom of speech and expression was strictly curtailed, the media was tightly controlled by the government, while local culture was systemically oppressed. Political dissidents who spoke up for democratic reforms and increased autonomy were ruthlessly persecuted by the island's dictatorial government.
The times have changed drastically since the removal of martial law in 1987. Taiwan is arguably the most vibrant democracy in East Asia, a fact recognized by reputable organisations such as Freedom House and Human Rights Watch. The press in Taiwan enjoys an unprecedented amount of freedom, and Taiwanese citizens are able to participate directly in regular elections and referenda. Local culture and language has undergone a recent revival, after a long period of suppression.
Such drastic improvements were not easy to achieve. Democracy activists in the 1970's and 1980's risked their own livelihoods to speak out for political reforms and social justice. Some of these advocates and their families were harassed, while others were imprisoned indefinitely for sedition. In fact it was the illegal formation of the Democratic Progressive Party by political activists that was key in pressuring the government into lifting martial law a year later.
Enjoying the progress achieved on Taiwan in these last 20 years, it suffices to say that the Taiwanese cherish their hard-won freedoms and home-built democracy. They know first hand the sacrifices that were made to transform their country from a brutal dictatorship to a fledgling democracy. There is no desire for them to return to the dark days of martial law style dictatorship.
However, the democracy that the Taiwanese have built is under siege from China's military threats. The Chinese government refuses to recognize the success of Taiwan's democracy, nor the vast majority of Taiwanese that reject the idea of unification with China. After overcoming the harsh rule of the Japanese empire and Chinese nationalists in the 20th century, the Taiwanese people do not want to be ruled by the Chinese communist dictatorship that regularly commits human rights atrocities.
Unfortunately, nations which pay lip service to the values of human rights and democracy are too afraid to oppose China's expansionist rhetoric. In their bid to appease the growing power that China represents, they are quick to oppose any moves towards independence by Taiwan, but all too slow to condemn the fast increasing number of missiles that China points at Taiwan. While such nations support the independence of Kosovo and East Timor, they are unable to recognize the right of the Taiwanese people to determine the fate of their island nation.
The 20 year anniversary of the lifting of martial law will be celebrated on Taiwan as a triumph of democracy and freedom over oppression and tyranny. But such a victory stands incomplete so long as nations refuse to recognize the right of the Taiwanese people to safeguard their democracy from Chinese aggression.
Dr. Stan Lai, Spokesperson,
FAPA Europe
The times have changed drastically since the removal of martial law in 1987. Taiwan is arguably the most vibrant democracy in East Asia, a fact recognized by reputable organisations such as Freedom House and Human Rights Watch. The press in Taiwan enjoys an unprecedented amount of freedom, and Taiwanese citizens are able to participate directly in regular elections and referenda. Local culture and language has undergone a recent revival, after a long period of suppression.
Such drastic improvements were not easy to achieve. Democracy activists in the 1970's and 1980's risked their own livelihoods to speak out for political reforms and social justice. Some of these advocates and their families were harassed, while others were imprisoned indefinitely for sedition. In fact it was the illegal formation of the Democratic Progressive Party by political activists that was key in pressuring the government into lifting martial law a year later.
Enjoying the progress achieved on Taiwan in these last 20 years, it suffices to say that the Taiwanese cherish their hard-won freedoms and home-built democracy. They know first hand the sacrifices that were made to transform their country from a brutal dictatorship to a fledgling democracy. There is no desire for them to return to the dark days of martial law style dictatorship.
However, the democracy that the Taiwanese have built is under siege from China's military threats. The Chinese government refuses to recognize the success of Taiwan's democracy, nor the vast majority of Taiwanese that reject the idea of unification with China. After overcoming the harsh rule of the Japanese empire and Chinese nationalists in the 20th century, the Taiwanese people do not want to be ruled by the Chinese communist dictatorship that regularly commits human rights atrocities.
Unfortunately, nations which pay lip service to the values of human rights and democracy are too afraid to oppose China's expansionist rhetoric. In their bid to appease the growing power that China represents, they are quick to oppose any moves towards independence by Taiwan, but all too slow to condemn the fast increasing number of missiles that China points at Taiwan. While such nations support the independence of Kosovo and East Timor, they are unable to recognize the right of the Taiwanese people to determine the fate of their island nation.
The 20 year anniversary of the lifting of martial law will be celebrated on Taiwan as a triumph of democracy and freedom over oppression and tyranny. But such a victory stands incomplete so long as nations refuse to recognize the right of the Taiwanese people to safeguard their democracy from Chinese aggression.
Dr. Stan Lai, Spokesperson,
FAPA Europe
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Une nouvelle politique étrangère pour la France?
Le président de la France, Nicolas Sarkozy, a fait campagne avec une promesse qu'il va changer les politiques du passé. Ceux qui lui ont choisi éspère qu'il peut réformer la bureaucratie française, et revitaliser l'économie stagnante de la France. Mais pour les activistes de la démocratie et des droits de l'homme, ils éspèrent que Sarkozy peut exprimer une politique étrangère qui est très differente que son prédécesseur, Jacques Chirac.
France estime qu'elle-même est une modèle démocratique qui est un exemple pour les autres nations. Mais la politique étrangère de Jacques Chirac pendant sa période de jouissance crée doute pour le légs de la France. L'amitié de Chirac avec les dictateurs africains a été critiqué par Sarkozy, et aussi par la candidate socialiste, Ségolène Royal. La plupart de l'aide étrangère de la France en Afrique est arrivée finalement dans les mains des autocrates corrompu, au lieu des citoyens africains qui souffrent de la pauvrété.
Cet amitié était la plus évidente pendent le sommet franco-africain en 2003, quand Chirac a invité Robert Mugabe de Zimbabwe avec bienvenue, en dépit de l'interdire de la France sur les officiels zimbabwéan dans l'UE, pour les viols atroces des droits de l'homme et les éléctions truqués.
Les activistes étaient déçus en 2005, quand Chirac a voulu la termination de l'embargo de l'UE sur les armes en Chine, qui était imposé en 1989 après la massacre de Tiananmen Square. La proposition de Chirac a évoqué beaucoup l'opposition forte des autres états européenne, les États-Unis, le Japon, et les associations des droits de l'homme. La position de Chirac était très absurdes, parce que la Chine n'a pas renoncé l'emploi de la force contre Taïwan, ni la Chine s'a amélioré la situation concernant les droits de l'homme non plus.
Chirac a critiqué Taïwan, une démocratie qui soutient les libertés et les droits fondamentaux de ses citoyens, quand le gouvernment élu de Taïwan a exécuté un référendum, qui était important pour consolider la démocratie. Ce référendum a été critiqué par Chirac en 2004, comme une erreur grave, pendant une visite d'état par le président de la Chine, Hu Jintao. Ces actions de la France, ont abîmé la crédibilité de la France dans le monde.
Sarkozy a maintenant une occasion magnifique, de transformer la politique étrangère de la France, pour que la France soutient la diffusion de la démocratie et les droits fondamentaux de tous les peuples. Il peut commencer à rediriger l'aide étrangère de la France aux pays qui n'ont pas corruption répandue, et qui ont les gouvernments élus. Il peut lancer les actions concrètes dans l'ONU pour aider à terminer le génocide en Darfour.
Sarkozy peut employer l'influence de la France à la Chine, pour que la Chine renonce l'utilisation de la force contre Taïwan, respecte l'autonomie du Tibet, et termine l'oppression des dissidents politiques. Il devrait soutenir l'inclusion de Taïwan dans les organisations internationales, comme l'OMS.
Lorque Sarkozy a été élu, il a dit, "Je veux lancer un appel à tous ceux qui, dans le monde, croient aux valeurs de la tolérance, de la liberté, de la démocratie, de l'humanisme. A tous ceux qui sont persécutées par les tyrannies et par les dictatures, je veux leur dire qu la fierté et le devoir de la France sera d'être à leurs côtés." Ces mots sont bienvenus dans notre monde qui a besoin de la direction des droits de l'homme forte. Le monde entière le regarder, si ses mots deviennent vrais.
France estime qu'elle-même est une modèle démocratique qui est un exemple pour les autres nations. Mais la politique étrangère de Jacques Chirac pendant sa période de jouissance crée doute pour le légs de la France. L'amitié de Chirac avec les dictateurs africains a été critiqué par Sarkozy, et aussi par la candidate socialiste, Ségolène Royal. La plupart de l'aide étrangère de la France en Afrique est arrivée finalement dans les mains des autocrates corrompu, au lieu des citoyens africains qui souffrent de la pauvrété.
Cet amitié était la plus évidente pendent le sommet franco-africain en 2003, quand Chirac a invité Robert Mugabe de Zimbabwe avec bienvenue, en dépit de l'interdire de la France sur les officiels zimbabwéan dans l'UE, pour les viols atroces des droits de l'homme et les éléctions truqués.
Les activistes étaient déçus en 2005, quand Chirac a voulu la termination de l'embargo de l'UE sur les armes en Chine, qui était imposé en 1989 après la massacre de Tiananmen Square. La proposition de Chirac a évoqué beaucoup l'opposition forte des autres états européenne, les États-Unis, le Japon, et les associations des droits de l'homme. La position de Chirac était très absurdes, parce que la Chine n'a pas renoncé l'emploi de la force contre Taïwan, ni la Chine s'a amélioré la situation concernant les droits de l'homme non plus.
Chirac a critiqué Taïwan, une démocratie qui soutient les libertés et les droits fondamentaux de ses citoyens, quand le gouvernment élu de Taïwan a exécuté un référendum, qui était important pour consolider la démocratie. Ce référendum a été critiqué par Chirac en 2004, comme une erreur grave, pendant une visite d'état par le président de la Chine, Hu Jintao. Ces actions de la France, ont abîmé la crédibilité de la France dans le monde.
Sarkozy a maintenant une occasion magnifique, de transformer la politique étrangère de la France, pour que la France soutient la diffusion de la démocratie et les droits fondamentaux de tous les peuples. Il peut commencer à rediriger l'aide étrangère de la France aux pays qui n'ont pas corruption répandue, et qui ont les gouvernments élus. Il peut lancer les actions concrètes dans l'ONU pour aider à terminer le génocide en Darfour.
Sarkozy peut employer l'influence de la France à la Chine, pour que la Chine renonce l'utilisation de la force contre Taïwan, respecte l'autonomie du Tibet, et termine l'oppression des dissidents politiques. Il devrait soutenir l'inclusion de Taïwan dans les organisations internationales, comme l'OMS.
Lorque Sarkozy a été élu, il a dit, "Je veux lancer un appel à tous ceux qui, dans le monde, croient aux valeurs de la tolérance, de la liberté, de la démocratie, de l'humanisme. A tous ceux qui sont persécutées par les tyrannies et par les dictatures, je veux leur dire qu la fierté et le devoir de la France sera d'être à leurs côtés." Ces mots sont bienvenus dans notre monde qui a besoin de la direction des droits de l'homme forte. Le monde entière le regarder, si ses mots deviennent vrais.
A New Foreign Policy for France?
French president Nicolas Sarkozy campaigned on a clear pledge to break with the policies of the past. Those that voted for him hope that he can reform France's bureaucracy, and kickstart the stagnating French economy. But for democracy and human rights activists throughout the world, there is hope that Sarkozy can articulate a foreign policy that is vastly different from that of his predecessor, Jacques Chirac.
France has long prided itself in being a model democracy that is an example for other nations to follow. But Chirac's foreign policy during his 12 year tenure has left this reputation in doubt. Chirac's friendships with African dictators have been criticized heavily both by Sarkozy and socialist presidential candidate, Segolene Royal. The bulk of France's foreign aid to Africa has ended up in the hands of corrupt autocrats, rather than helping alleviate the poverty of ordinary African citizens.
Chirac's coddling of corrupt dictators was most apparent during the 2003 Franco-African summit, when he welcomed Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe with open arms, despite an EU travel ban on Zimbabwean officials for atrocious human rights violations and rigged elections.
Human rights advocates were disappointed again in 2005, when Chirac pushed for an end to the EU arms embargo against China imposed in 1989 after the Tiananmen Square massacre. Chirac's proposal evoked strong opposition from other EU states, the US, Japan, and human rights groups. His stance was particularly perplexing as China had neither renounced the use of force against Taiwan, nor improved its human rights situation.
In addition, Chirac went out of his way to chastise democratic Taiwan for holding a referendum initiated by its elected government. The referendum, which was seen as key to consolidating democracy on Taiwan, was labelled a "grave error" by Chirac during a state visit to Paris by Chinese President Hu Jintao in 2004. Such willingness to align himself with these dubious dictatorships has damaged much of France's credibility.
Sarkozy, however, has an excellent opportunity transform France's foreign policy such that France is supportive of democratic development on the international stage, positioning itself as a steadfast advocate for the liberty and human rights of all peoples. He can start by redirecting foreign aid to African nations that do not suffer from rampant corruption and whose governments are elected by democratic mechanisms. He can also push concrete measures at the UN to help end the genocide in the Darfur region.
Sarkozy can also use France's influence to press China to renounce the use of force against Taiwan, to respect Tibetan autonomy, and to stop the ruthless persecution of political dissidents. He should push the EU to support Taiwan's inclusion to the World Health Organization, so that the island's 23 million citizens are involved in the international fight against epidemic spread and disease prevention.
In his acceptance speech, Sarkozy declared, "I want to launch an appeal to all those in the world who believe in the values of tolerance, freedom, democracy, humanism. To all those who are persecuted by tyranny and dictatorship, I want to say that the pride and the duty of France will be to be on their side." Such words are welcome in a world in need of strong human rights leadership. The entire world will be watching to see whether Sarkozy remains true to his promise.
France has long prided itself in being a model democracy that is an example for other nations to follow. But Chirac's foreign policy during his 12 year tenure has left this reputation in doubt. Chirac's friendships with African dictators have been criticized heavily both by Sarkozy and socialist presidential candidate, Segolene Royal. The bulk of France's foreign aid to Africa has ended up in the hands of corrupt autocrats, rather than helping alleviate the poverty of ordinary African citizens.
Chirac's coddling of corrupt dictators was most apparent during the 2003 Franco-African summit, when he welcomed Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe with open arms, despite an EU travel ban on Zimbabwean officials for atrocious human rights violations and rigged elections.
Human rights advocates were disappointed again in 2005, when Chirac pushed for an end to the EU arms embargo against China imposed in 1989 after the Tiananmen Square massacre. Chirac's proposal evoked strong opposition from other EU states, the US, Japan, and human rights groups. His stance was particularly perplexing as China had neither renounced the use of force against Taiwan, nor improved its human rights situation.
In addition, Chirac went out of his way to chastise democratic Taiwan for holding a referendum initiated by its elected government. The referendum, which was seen as key to consolidating democracy on Taiwan, was labelled a "grave error" by Chirac during a state visit to Paris by Chinese President Hu Jintao in 2004. Such willingness to align himself with these dubious dictatorships has damaged much of France's credibility.
Sarkozy, however, has an excellent opportunity transform France's foreign policy such that France is supportive of democratic development on the international stage, positioning itself as a steadfast advocate for the liberty and human rights of all peoples. He can start by redirecting foreign aid to African nations that do not suffer from rampant corruption and whose governments are elected by democratic mechanisms. He can also push concrete measures at the UN to help end the genocide in the Darfur region.
Sarkozy can also use France's influence to press China to renounce the use of force against Taiwan, to respect Tibetan autonomy, and to stop the ruthless persecution of political dissidents. He should push the EU to support Taiwan's inclusion to the World Health Organization, so that the island's 23 million citizens are involved in the international fight against epidemic spread and disease prevention.
In his acceptance speech, Sarkozy declared, "I want to launch an appeal to all those in the world who believe in the values of tolerance, freedom, democracy, humanism. To all those who are persecuted by tyranny and dictatorship, I want to say that the pride and the duty of France will be to be on their side." Such words are welcome in a world in need of strong human rights leadership. The entire world will be watching to see whether Sarkozy remains true to his promise.
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Tiananmen - 18 years later
18 years after the ruthless massacre of student protesters in Tiananmen, what has really changed? The authoritarian government of China still refuses to apologize for the slaughter of innocent voices calling for increased democracy in China. The communist regime still exercises an iron-grip on state-controlled media and internet access. Ruthless persecution still continues against Falun Dafa practitioners, while democracies such as Taiwan and Japan feel growing unease at China's double-digit increases of its military budget.
European leaders must realize that the human rights situation in China is still in a terrible state. Rather than ignoring such human rights violations, they must condemn the abuses committed by the communist regime. They must state clearly that the E.U. arms embargo will remain until the human rights situation drastically improves and China renounces the use of force against democratic Taiwan. Europeans believe strongly in the values of freedom and democracy. It is time for their leaders to express such sentiments.
European leaders must realize that the human rights situation in China is still in a terrible state. Rather than ignoring such human rights violations, they must condemn the abuses committed by the communist regime. They must state clearly that the E.U. arms embargo will remain until the human rights situation drastically improves and China renounces the use of force against democratic Taiwan. Europeans believe strongly in the values of freedom and democracy. It is time for their leaders to express such sentiments.
La menace de la Chine
18 ans après le massacre de la place Tiananmen, les droits de l'homme manquent encore en Chine. Le regime communiste opprime encore les dissidents politiques, et persécute les praticiens Falun Dafa sans remords. Les organisations de défense des droits de l'homme sont deçues avec la situation en Chine aujourd'hui, qui n'a pas amélioré. En plus, la Chine menace Taïwan, une démocratie vivante, en vidant 1000 missiles à cette île.
Les responsables français devraient se soutenir, que la menace de la Chine contre la liberté, la démocratie, et les droits de l'homme n'evanouit pas. Si la fierté et le devoir de la France sera d'être au côté de la démocratie, il faut que le gouvernement de la France condamne fortement les viols des droits de l'homme de la Chine. Si les valeurs de la France sont vraiment la tolérance, la liberté, la démocratie, et l'humanisme, il faut que la France soutient fermement les activistes démocratiques en Chine, et la démocratie de Taïwan.
Les responsables français devraient se soutenir, que la menace de la Chine contre la liberté, la démocratie, et les droits de l'homme n'evanouit pas. Si la fierté et le devoir de la France sera d'être au côté de la démocratie, il faut que le gouvernement de la France condamne fortement les viols des droits de l'homme de la Chine. Si les valeurs de la France sont vraiment la tolérance, la liberté, la démocratie, et l'humanisme, il faut que la France soutient fermement les activistes démocratiques en Chine, et la démocratie de Taïwan.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Sarkozy muss die "ein China Politik" aufgeben
Zur sofortigen Veröffentlichung
Dienstag 22. Mai 2007, Freiburg, Deutschland – Der Formosa Verein für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit (FAPA Europa), hat den französischen Präsident Nicolas Sarkozy aufgefordert die "ein China Politik" aufzugeben. Auf Grund der "ein China Politik" hat Frankreich keine diplomatischen Beziehungen mit Taiwan. Abgesehen davon, ist Taiwan eine unabhängige und demokratische Nation.
"Nicolas Sarkozy hat sich in seiner Dankesrede klar geäußert, dass der Stolz und die Pflicht Frankreichs auf der Seite der Demokratie und der Freiheit stehen würden," bemerkte Dr. Stan Lai, Sprecher für FAPA Europa. "Präsident Sarkozy kann seinen eigenen Worten treu bleiben indem er sich weigert, sich der chinesischen Diktatur zu beugen und volle diplomatische Beziehungen mit Taiwan aufnimmt."
Die französische Außenpolitik unter dem ehemaligen Präsidenten Jacques Chirac ignorierte oft die grausame Menschenrechtsakte Chinas. 2005 drängte Chirac für eine Aufhebung des EU Waffenembargos gegen China, ungeachtet dessen, dass China sich weigert auf den Gebrauch von Gewalt gegen Taiwan zu verzichten. China bedroht die Insel jetzt mit über 1000 Kurzstrecken Raketen und einer zweistelliger Zunahme in seinem Militärbudget.
"Wenn Sarkozy die französischen Werte von Menschlichkeit, Demokratie und die Freiheit aller Völker, hochhalten will, sollte er Taiwan in der internationalen Gemeinschaft mit offenen Armen empfangen," fügte Lai hinzu. "Er muss auch die schrecklichen Menschenrechtsverletzungen die von China begangen wurden verurteilen."
Taiwan entwickelte sich zu einer blühenden Demokratie die, die fundamentalen Rechte und Freiheiten seiner Bürger respektiert. Meinungsumfragen zeigen ständig, dass die überwiegende Mehrheit der Taiwanesen den Gedanken, einer Vereinigung mit China ablehnen.
"Taiwan ist eine Nation mit 23 Millionen Einwohnern, das sind mehr als bei 21 der 27 EU Staaten," sagte Alison Hsieh, Forscherin für FAPA Europa. "Das Taiwanesische Volk sind die einzigen die das Recht haben die Zukunft ihres Landes zu bestimmen."
Dienstag 22. Mai 2007, Freiburg, Deutschland – Der Formosa Verein für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit (FAPA Europa), hat den französischen Präsident Nicolas Sarkozy aufgefordert die "ein China Politik" aufzugeben. Auf Grund der "ein China Politik" hat Frankreich keine diplomatischen Beziehungen mit Taiwan. Abgesehen davon, ist Taiwan eine unabhängige und demokratische Nation.
"Nicolas Sarkozy hat sich in seiner Dankesrede klar geäußert, dass der Stolz und die Pflicht Frankreichs auf der Seite der Demokratie und der Freiheit stehen würden," bemerkte Dr. Stan Lai, Sprecher für FAPA Europa. "Präsident Sarkozy kann seinen eigenen Worten treu bleiben indem er sich weigert, sich der chinesischen Diktatur zu beugen und volle diplomatische Beziehungen mit Taiwan aufnimmt."
Die französische Außenpolitik unter dem ehemaligen Präsidenten Jacques Chirac ignorierte oft die grausame Menschenrechtsakte Chinas. 2005 drängte Chirac für eine Aufhebung des EU Waffenembargos gegen China, ungeachtet dessen, dass China sich weigert auf den Gebrauch von Gewalt gegen Taiwan zu verzichten. China bedroht die Insel jetzt mit über 1000 Kurzstrecken Raketen und einer zweistelliger Zunahme in seinem Militärbudget.
"Wenn Sarkozy die französischen Werte von Menschlichkeit, Demokratie und die Freiheit aller Völker, hochhalten will, sollte er Taiwan in der internationalen Gemeinschaft mit offenen Armen empfangen," fügte Lai hinzu. "Er muss auch die schrecklichen Menschenrechtsverletzungen die von China begangen wurden verurteilen."
Taiwan entwickelte sich zu einer blühenden Demokratie die, die fundamentalen Rechte und Freiheiten seiner Bürger respektiert. Meinungsumfragen zeigen ständig, dass die überwiegende Mehrheit der Taiwanesen den Gedanken, einer Vereinigung mit China ablehnen.
"Taiwan ist eine Nation mit 23 Millionen Einwohnern, das sind mehr als bei 21 der 27 EU Staaten," sagte Alison Hsieh, Forscherin für FAPA Europa. "Das Taiwanesische Volk sind die einzigen die das Recht haben die Zukunft ihres Landes zu bestimmen."
Il faut que Sarkozy abandonne le principe "d'une seule Chine"
Pour diffusion immédiate
Mardi, le 22 Mai, 2007, Fribourg, Allemagne - L'Association Formosane pour les Affaires Publiques (L'AFAP Europe) réclame l'abandon du principe "d'une seule Chine" à M. Nicolas Sarkozy, le nouveau président de la France. À cause de ce principe, la France n'a pas pu établir les relations diplomatiques avec Taïwan, même si Taïwan est un état indépendent et démocratique.
"Après qu'il avait été élu, Monsieur Sarkozy a dit clairement que la fierté et le devoir de la France seront d'être à la côté de la liberté et de la démocratie," a remarqué Dr. Stan Lai, un porte-parole de l'AFAP Canada. "Monsieur le président devrait garder sa promesse en établissant les relations diplomatiques avec Taïwan, en dépit des objections absurdes de la Chine."
La politique étrangère de M. Jacques Chirac, l'ancien président de la France, a longtemps negligé les violations des droits de l'homme de la Chine. En 2005, Chirac a même soutenu la levée de l'UE sur les ventes d'armes à la Chine, sans avoir consideré la menace de la China contre Taïwan. N'ayant pas renoncé au recours au moyen militaire contre Taïwan, la Chine possède actuellement plus de 1000 missiles balistiques visés à Taïwan.
"Si M. Sarkozy chérit les valeurs françaises de l'humanisme, de la démocratie, et de la liberté, il devrait soutenir l'idée de l'acception de Taïwan dans la communauté internationale," a ajouté Lai. "Il devrait condamner aussi les violations horrifiants des droits de l'homme commis par le gouvernement dictatorial de la Chine."
Taïwan est devenue une démocratie prospère et vivante et les sondages à Taïwan indiquent que la grande majorité de taïwanais s'oppose fortement au unification avec la Chine.
"Taïwan est un pays avec 23 millions de citoyens, et sa population est plus nombreuse que 21 parmi les 27 pays de l'UE," a dit Alison Hsieh, une rechercheuse de l'AFAP Europe. "Le droit à décider de l'avenir de Taïwan est réservé exclusivement au peuple taïwanais."
Mardi, le 22 Mai, 2007, Fribourg, Allemagne - L'Association Formosane pour les Affaires Publiques (L'AFAP Europe) réclame l'abandon du principe "d'une seule Chine" à M. Nicolas Sarkozy, le nouveau président de la France. À cause de ce principe, la France n'a pas pu établir les relations diplomatiques avec Taïwan, même si Taïwan est un état indépendent et démocratique.
"Après qu'il avait été élu, Monsieur Sarkozy a dit clairement que la fierté et le devoir de la France seront d'être à la côté de la liberté et de la démocratie," a remarqué Dr. Stan Lai, un porte-parole de l'AFAP Canada. "Monsieur le président devrait garder sa promesse en établissant les relations diplomatiques avec Taïwan, en dépit des objections absurdes de la Chine."
La politique étrangère de M. Jacques Chirac, l'ancien président de la France, a longtemps negligé les violations des droits de l'homme de la Chine. En 2005, Chirac a même soutenu la levée de l'UE sur les ventes d'armes à la Chine, sans avoir consideré la menace de la China contre Taïwan. N'ayant pas renoncé au recours au moyen militaire contre Taïwan, la Chine possède actuellement plus de 1000 missiles balistiques visés à Taïwan.
"Si M. Sarkozy chérit les valeurs françaises de l'humanisme, de la démocratie, et de la liberté, il devrait soutenir l'idée de l'acception de Taïwan dans la communauté internationale," a ajouté Lai. "Il devrait condamner aussi les violations horrifiants des droits de l'homme commis par le gouvernement dictatorial de la Chine."
Taïwan est devenue une démocratie prospère et vivante et les sondages à Taïwan indiquent que la grande majorité de taïwanais s'oppose fortement au unification avec la Chine.
"Taïwan est un pays avec 23 millions de citoyens, et sa population est plus nombreuse que 21 parmi les 27 pays de l'UE," a dit Alison Hsieh, une rechercheuse de l'AFAP Europe. "Le droit à décider de l'avenir de Taïwan est réservé exclusivement au peuple taïwanais."
Sarkozy must drop "one China" policy
For immediate release
Tuesday, May 22, 2007, Freiburg, Germany - The Formosan Association for Public Affairs Europe (FAPA Europe) called on French President Nicolas Sarkozy to drop the "one China" policy today. Due to the "one China" policy, France does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan, despite the fact that Taiwan is an independent, democratic nation.
"Nicolas Sarkozy stated clearly in his acceptance speech that the pride and duty of France would be on the side of democracy and freedom," remarked Dr. Stan Lai, spokesperson for FAPA Europe. "President Sarkozy can remain true to his words by refusing to kowtow to the Chinese dictatorship, while establishing full diplomatic relations with democratic Taiwan."
French foreign policy under former French president Jacques Chirac often ignored the atrocious human rights record of China. In 2005, Chirac pushed for the end of the EU arms embargo against China, despite China's refusal to renounce the use of force against Taiwan. China now threatens the island nation with over 1000 short-range missiles and double-digit increases in its military budget.
"If Sarkozy wants to uphold the French values of humanism, democracy, and the liberty of all peoples, he should welcome Taiwan into the international community with open arms," added Lai. "He must also condemn the horrible human rights violations committed by the Chinese dictatorship."
Taiwan, which has never been governed by the People's Republic of China, has evolved into a flourishing democracy that respects fully the fundamental rights and freedoms of its citizens. Opinion polls consistently show that the overwhelming majority of Taiwanese citizens reject the idea of unification with China.
"Taiwan is a nation of 23 million citizens, greater than 21 of 27 EU states," stated Alison Hsieh, senior researcher for FAPA Europe. "The Taiwanese people are the only ones that have the right to determine the future of their country."
###
About FAPA Europe:
FAPA Europe is a European organization that promotes European-Taiwan relations and supports the sovereign right of Taiwan to self-determination.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007, Freiburg, Germany - The Formosan Association for Public Affairs Europe (FAPA Europe) called on French President Nicolas Sarkozy to drop the "one China" policy today. Due to the "one China" policy, France does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan, despite the fact that Taiwan is an independent, democratic nation.
"Nicolas Sarkozy stated clearly in his acceptance speech that the pride and duty of France would be on the side of democracy and freedom," remarked Dr. Stan Lai, spokesperson for FAPA Europe. "President Sarkozy can remain true to his words by refusing to kowtow to the Chinese dictatorship, while establishing full diplomatic relations with democratic Taiwan."
French foreign policy under former French president Jacques Chirac often ignored the atrocious human rights record of China. In 2005, Chirac pushed for the end of the EU arms embargo against China, despite China's refusal to renounce the use of force against Taiwan. China now threatens the island nation with over 1000 short-range missiles and double-digit increases in its military budget.
"If Sarkozy wants to uphold the French values of humanism, democracy, and the liberty of all peoples, he should welcome Taiwan into the international community with open arms," added Lai. "He must also condemn the horrible human rights violations committed by the Chinese dictatorship."
Taiwan, which has never been governed by the People's Republic of China, has evolved into a flourishing democracy that respects fully the fundamental rights and freedoms of its citizens. Opinion polls consistently show that the overwhelming majority of Taiwanese citizens reject the idea of unification with China.
"Taiwan is a nation of 23 million citizens, greater than 21 of 27 EU states," stated Alison Hsieh, senior researcher for FAPA Europe. "The Taiwanese people are the only ones that have the right to determine the future of their country."
###
About FAPA Europe:
FAPA Europe is a European organization that promotes European-Taiwan relations and supports the sovereign right of Taiwan to self-determination.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Est-ce que l'Union Europeénne veut soutenir les droits de l'homme?
Sur le site internet de l'UE, on peut lire la phrase suivante: "Les droits de l'homme, la démocratie et l’État de droit sont des valeurs essentielles de l’Union Européenne." Lors de l'Assemblée Mondiale de la Santé (AMS), l'UE aura une belle occasion de soutenir les droits de l'homme, en appuyant l'admission de Taïwan dans l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé (OMS). En raison de l'exclusion de Taïwan, 23 million citoyens taïwanais se voient refusé le droit de la santé universelle.
L'adhésion de Taïwan aux organisations internationales n’est pas appuyée par l’UE, selon le "principe d'une seule Chine". Mais on peut se demander si ce principe est vraiment un principe, ou une inclinaison devant les autocrates de Pékin. Mais l'AMS sera une occasion où l'UE pourra exprimer que sa politique étrangère est décidée en Europe, pas à Pékin.
Il est vrai que la Chine aurait une réaction colérique si l'UE soutenait cette admission de Taïwan. Un porte-parole du gouvernement de Chinois dirait certainement que ce soutien transgresse le "principe d'une seule Chine", et que les liens Sino-Européen sont menacés. Quoique la rhétorique chinoise apparaîtrait implacable, il est improbable que des répercussions substantielles se manifesteraient.
De toute façon, pourquoi l'Europe devrait-elle écouter la Chine? La Chine n'a plus aucune crédibilité le domaine de la santé. Souvenons-nous que c'était le refus de la Chine de rapporter la gravité du SRAS qui a causé la diffusion effrayante de la maladie à travers le monde. Même aujourd’hui, la Chine ne rapporte pas ses données sur la grippe aviaire à l'OMS.
Il est dans l'intérêt de l'Europe que Taïwan, avec qui elle a des liens culturels et commerciaux étroits, soit admise dans l'OMS. Il y a une importante circulation humaine entre l’Europe et Taiwan, et le commerce entre les deux s’élève à 35 milliards d’Euros par an. Avec l'augmentation du commerce et de l'intégration des économies, l'Europe ne doit pas permettre l'exclusion de Taïwan à l'OMS.
La Chine nie que l'exclusion de Taïwan empêche son accès aux ressources de l'OMS. Mais cette prétention est fausse. En 2003, quand Taïwan a rapporté ses cas de SRAS, elle a demandé de l'aide à l'OMS, mais comme Taïwan n'est pas un membre de l'organisation, l'OMS ne lui a pas offert d’aide avant sept semaines d'attente. Après le tremblement de terre de 1999 à Taïwan, l'OMS a refusé de fournir l'aide à Taïwan, malgré un bilan de 3000 morts.
En dépit de son exclusion, Taïwan rapporte toutes ses données de maladie à l'OMS, et est en faveur d’une coopération internationale pour empêcher les épidémies. Alors il est ironique, n'est-ce pas, que c'est la Chine, avec son adhésion entière, qui ne coopère pas avec l'OMS, alors que Taïwan, sans aucune adhésion, coopère entièrement?
L'UE peut démontrer au monde qu'elle soutient fortement les droits et le bien-être de l'homme. L'UE peut démontrer qu'elle s'intéresse à la coopération internationale de la santé et à réduire la diffusion des maladies. L'UE peut reconnaître que la santé de 23 millions de taiwanais est plus importante que les protestations déraisonnables de la Chine. Si l'UE veut être une alliance qui soutient la démocratie et les droits fondamentaux, il faut qu'elle soutienne entièrement l'admission de Taïwan à l'OMS.
L'adhésion de Taïwan aux organisations internationales n’est pas appuyée par l’UE, selon le "principe d'une seule Chine". Mais on peut se demander si ce principe est vraiment un principe, ou une inclinaison devant les autocrates de Pékin. Mais l'AMS sera une occasion où l'UE pourra exprimer que sa politique étrangère est décidée en Europe, pas à Pékin.
Il est vrai que la Chine aurait une réaction colérique si l'UE soutenait cette admission de Taïwan. Un porte-parole du gouvernement de Chinois dirait certainement que ce soutien transgresse le "principe d'une seule Chine", et que les liens Sino-Européen sont menacés. Quoique la rhétorique chinoise apparaîtrait implacable, il est improbable que des répercussions substantielles se manifesteraient.
De toute façon, pourquoi l'Europe devrait-elle écouter la Chine? La Chine n'a plus aucune crédibilité le domaine de la santé. Souvenons-nous que c'était le refus de la Chine de rapporter la gravité du SRAS qui a causé la diffusion effrayante de la maladie à travers le monde. Même aujourd’hui, la Chine ne rapporte pas ses données sur la grippe aviaire à l'OMS.
Il est dans l'intérêt de l'Europe que Taïwan, avec qui elle a des liens culturels et commerciaux étroits, soit admise dans l'OMS. Il y a une importante circulation humaine entre l’Europe et Taiwan, et le commerce entre les deux s’élève à 35 milliards d’Euros par an. Avec l'augmentation du commerce et de l'intégration des économies, l'Europe ne doit pas permettre l'exclusion de Taïwan à l'OMS.
La Chine nie que l'exclusion de Taïwan empêche son accès aux ressources de l'OMS. Mais cette prétention est fausse. En 2003, quand Taïwan a rapporté ses cas de SRAS, elle a demandé de l'aide à l'OMS, mais comme Taïwan n'est pas un membre de l'organisation, l'OMS ne lui a pas offert d’aide avant sept semaines d'attente. Après le tremblement de terre de 1999 à Taïwan, l'OMS a refusé de fournir l'aide à Taïwan, malgré un bilan de 3000 morts.
En dépit de son exclusion, Taïwan rapporte toutes ses données de maladie à l'OMS, et est en faveur d’une coopération internationale pour empêcher les épidémies. Alors il est ironique, n'est-ce pas, que c'est la Chine, avec son adhésion entière, qui ne coopère pas avec l'OMS, alors que Taïwan, sans aucune adhésion, coopère entièrement?
L'UE peut démontrer au monde qu'elle soutient fortement les droits et le bien-être de l'homme. L'UE peut démontrer qu'elle s'intéresse à la coopération internationale de la santé et à réduire la diffusion des maladies. L'UE peut reconnaître que la santé de 23 millions de taiwanais est plus importante que les protestations déraisonnables de la Chine. Si l'UE veut être une alliance qui soutient la démocratie et les droits fondamentaux, il faut qu'elle soutienne entièrement l'admission de Taïwan à l'OMS.
Will die Europäische Union die Menschenrechte unterstützen?
Auf der Homepage von der Europäischen Union (EU), kann man den Satz "Menschenrechte, Demokratie und Rechtstaatlichkeit sind grundlegende Werte der Europäischen Union" lesen. Die Abstimmung auf der Weltgesundheitsversammlung über die Aufnahme von Taiwan zur Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) ist eine gute Gelegenheit die Menschenrechte und die Demokratie zu unterstützen, indem der Beitrittsantrag von Taiwan unterstützt wird. Durch die Ausgrenzung von Taiwan aus der WHO, haben 23 Millionen Taiwanesen keinen Informationszugang zur WHO.
Obwohl sich China der Mitgliedschaft Taiwans in der WHO entgegensetzt, darf die EU nicht diese unzumutbaren Einwände bei der bevorstehenden Abstimmung in der Weltgesundheitsversammlung berücksichtigen. Mit vielen wirtschaftlichen und kulturellen Bindungen, darf Europa nicht die Ausgrenzung Taiwans von der WHO befürwortet. Viele Reisenden fliegen via Taiwan nach Europa. Ebenso ist Taiwan auch ein wichtiger Handelspartner für die EUs. Eine Ausgrenzung von Taiwan ist gefährlich für Europa und die ganze Welt.
China streitet jedoch ab, dass sie Ausgrenzung Taiwans den Zugang WHOs befuerwortet. In 2003 zum Beispiel musste Taiwan sieben Wochen nach dem ersten bekannt gewordenen SARS Fall auf Hilfe von der WHO warten. 1999 verursachte ein verheerendes Erdbeden mehr als 3000 Todesfälle, die WHO jedoch lehnte es ab Taiwan zu Hilfe zu kommen.
Wenn die EU wirklich die Menschenrechte und die Demokratie unterstützt, dann muss sie Taiwans Beitrittsantrag beipflichten. Die Gesundheit von 23 Millionen Taiwanesen ist wichtiger als der Widerstand Chinas.
Obwohl sich China der Mitgliedschaft Taiwans in der WHO entgegensetzt, darf die EU nicht diese unzumutbaren Einwände bei der bevorstehenden Abstimmung in der Weltgesundheitsversammlung berücksichtigen. Mit vielen wirtschaftlichen und kulturellen Bindungen, darf Europa nicht die Ausgrenzung Taiwans von der WHO befürwortet. Viele Reisenden fliegen via Taiwan nach Europa. Ebenso ist Taiwan auch ein wichtiger Handelspartner für die EUs. Eine Ausgrenzung von Taiwan ist gefährlich für Europa und die ganze Welt.
China streitet jedoch ab, dass sie Ausgrenzung Taiwans den Zugang WHOs befuerwortet. In 2003 zum Beispiel musste Taiwan sieben Wochen nach dem ersten bekannt gewordenen SARS Fall auf Hilfe von der WHO warten. 1999 verursachte ein verheerendes Erdbeden mehr als 3000 Todesfälle, die WHO jedoch lehnte es ab Taiwan zu Hilfe zu kommen.
Wenn die EU wirklich die Menschenrechte und die Demokratie unterstützt, dann muss sie Taiwans Beitrittsantrag beipflichten. Die Gesundheit von 23 Millionen Taiwanesen ist wichtiger als der Widerstand Chinas.
Will the EU kowtow to China again?
For an alliance that claims to value democracy and human rights, the European Union has a funny way of showing it. The EU's continued reluctance to fully support Taiwan's entry into the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international organizations betrays its failure to stand up for human rights in the international stage. At this year's World Health Assembly (WHA), the EU will again most likely refuse to support the right to universal health for 23 million Taiwanese citizens when Taiwan makes its annual bid for WHO admission.
The EU's perplexing reluctance to support a democratic nation like Taiwan can be traced to its confused "one China" policy. In fact, we can ask whether the "one China" policy is anything different than allowing China to dictate European foreign policy in East Asia. However, at this year's WHA, Europe has an opportunity to show that its Asian policy is made in Brussels rather than Beijing by fully supporting Taiwan's entry to the WHO, in spite of the "one China" policy.
If the EU were to support Taiwan's entry bid, China's reaction would be entirely predictable. A spokesperson for China would angrily denounce such an action, claim that it violated the "one China" policy, and emphatically state that Sino-European ties were being jeopardized. But while Chinese rhetoric would appear implacable, it is unlikely that any substantial repercussions would ever materialize.
It also begs the question: why should the EU listen to China on this issue anyway? China has long since lost any credibility it has in the area of international health cooperation. The rapid spread of SARS on an international scale was essentially caused by China's refusal to be forthright and transparent about the gravity of the SARS situation within its borders. Even four years later, China is unwilling to fully share data about epidemics such as avian bird flu with the WHO. The disturbing reports of the Chinese state sanctioning the organ harvesting of Falun Dafa practitioners directly contradicts WHO standards.
In any case, it is in Europe's interest to have Taiwan as a WHO member, fully integrated in the international health community. With bilateral trade totalling 35 billion Euros annually and the large number of travellers between Taiwan and Europe, the EU simply cannot afford to have Taiwan outside the scope of international prevention efforts against transmittable diseases. For its part, Taiwan has shown that it can make considerable contributions to international health, including assistance to AIDS prevention, and Tsunami victims.
China denies that the lack of membership impedes Taiwan's access to WHO resources. But European policy makers should recognize that this claim is simply nonsense. During the 2003 SARS outbreak, WHO officials waited seven weeks before going to Taiwan and offering assistance. In 1999, the WHO refused to provide direct assistance to Taiwan as it suffered 3000 casualties from an earthquake registering 7.6 on the Richter scale.
Despite its continued exclusion, Taiwan has shown a willingness to cooperate fully with WHO authorities. Even while WHO officials were snubbing Taiwan's appeals during the SARS outbreak, Taiwan was promptly sharing all data it had about the extent of the epidemic spread. Isn't it ironic that China, enjoying the full benefits of WHO membership, refuses to abide by WHO procedures, while Taiwan, repeatedly rejected by the WHO, willingly embraces WHO standards and goals?
The WHA presents the EU with an excellent opportunity to stand up for human rights, democracy, and the well-being of all citizens. The EU can show that it genuinely cares about international health cooperation and disease prevention while stating that the health of 23 million Taiwanese citizens trump the bellicose objections of China. If the EU wants to be known as an alliance that fights for freedom and the fundamental rights of all peoples, then it must grasp this opportunity to fully support Taiwan's inclusion to the World Health Organization.
The EU's perplexing reluctance to support a democratic nation like Taiwan can be traced to its confused "one China" policy. In fact, we can ask whether the "one China" policy is anything different than allowing China to dictate European foreign policy in East Asia. However, at this year's WHA, Europe has an opportunity to show that its Asian policy is made in Brussels rather than Beijing by fully supporting Taiwan's entry to the WHO, in spite of the "one China" policy.
If the EU were to support Taiwan's entry bid, China's reaction would be entirely predictable. A spokesperson for China would angrily denounce such an action, claim that it violated the "one China" policy, and emphatically state that Sino-European ties were being jeopardized. But while Chinese rhetoric would appear implacable, it is unlikely that any substantial repercussions would ever materialize.
It also begs the question: why should the EU listen to China on this issue anyway? China has long since lost any credibility it has in the area of international health cooperation. The rapid spread of SARS on an international scale was essentially caused by China's refusal to be forthright and transparent about the gravity of the SARS situation within its borders. Even four years later, China is unwilling to fully share data about epidemics such as avian bird flu with the WHO. The disturbing reports of the Chinese state sanctioning the organ harvesting of Falun Dafa practitioners directly contradicts WHO standards.
In any case, it is in Europe's interest to have Taiwan as a WHO member, fully integrated in the international health community. With bilateral trade totalling 35 billion Euros annually and the large number of travellers between Taiwan and Europe, the EU simply cannot afford to have Taiwan outside the scope of international prevention efforts against transmittable diseases. For its part, Taiwan has shown that it can make considerable contributions to international health, including assistance to AIDS prevention, and Tsunami victims.
China denies that the lack of membership impedes Taiwan's access to WHO resources. But European policy makers should recognize that this claim is simply nonsense. During the 2003 SARS outbreak, WHO officials waited seven weeks before going to Taiwan and offering assistance. In 1999, the WHO refused to provide direct assistance to Taiwan as it suffered 3000 casualties from an earthquake registering 7.6 on the Richter scale.
Despite its continued exclusion, Taiwan has shown a willingness to cooperate fully with WHO authorities. Even while WHO officials were snubbing Taiwan's appeals during the SARS outbreak, Taiwan was promptly sharing all data it had about the extent of the epidemic spread. Isn't it ironic that China, enjoying the full benefits of WHO membership, refuses to abide by WHO procedures, while Taiwan, repeatedly rejected by the WHO, willingly embraces WHO standards and goals?
The WHA presents the EU with an excellent opportunity to stand up for human rights, democracy, and the well-being of all citizens. The EU can show that it genuinely cares about international health cooperation and disease prevention while stating that the health of 23 million Taiwanese citizens trump the bellicose objections of China. If the EU wants to be known as an alliance that fights for freedom and the fundamental rights of all peoples, then it must grasp this opportunity to fully support Taiwan's inclusion to the World Health Organization.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
FAPA Europa fordert die EU auf Taiwans WHO-Antrag zu unterstützen
FAPA Europa fordert die EU auf Taiwans WHO-Antrag zu unterstützen
Zur sofortigen Veröffentlichung
Dienstag der 8. mai 2007 Mainz Deutschland – Die Formosa Verein für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit Europa (FAPA Europa) fordert die volle Unterstützung der europäischen Union, von Taiwans WHO Mitgliedschaftsantrag bei der Welt-Gesundheitsversammlung in Genf nächste Woche. Taiwan, eine demokratische Nation mit 23 Millionen Menschen, die nicht in der WHO vertreten sind, wird ihren elften Versuch antreten um dieser internationalen Gesundheitsorganisation beizutreten.
"Der fortwährende Ausschluss Taiwans aus der WHO stellt ein gravierendes Gesundheitsrisiko für die Menschen auf der ganzen Welt dar" sagte Jenny Hsieh Sprecherin für FAPA Europa. "Es ist nicht akzeptabel, dass 23 Millionen taiwanesischen Bürgern der Zugang zu wesentlichen WHO Ressourcen verwehrt wird. Wenn die politischen Entscheidungsträger bei der Welt Gesundheitsversammlung ernsthaft die Verbreitung von Epidemien bekämpfen wollen, dann müssen sie Taiwan ohne zu zögern in die WHO aufnehmen."
Obwohl Taiwan zahlreiche Versuche gemacht hat, der WHO beizutreten, wurde der Antrag blockiert durch Einwände seitens Chinas. Der Ausschluss Taiwans hält seine Beamten davon ab direkte Informationen über Epidemien und Viren zu teilen, was verhinderte dass Taiwan Seuchenpräventionsstrategien mit der WHO während der SARS Epidemie 2003 koordinieren konnte.
"Dies ist eine Frage von fundamentalen Menschenrechten", fügte Hsieh hinzu. "Das Recht auf umfassende Gesundheit von 23 Millionen Taiwanesen überwiegt jeden politischen Einwand den China haben könnte".
Taiwanesische Beamte haben ihre Bereitschaft zum internationalen Bemühen für Prävention und Gesundheitsfürsorge bekundet. Mit aufgeklärten Ärzten, beständigen Beiträgen zur AIDS Prävention und Hilfe für Tsunami Opfer, hat Taiwan gezeigt, dass es einen wertvollen Beitrag zur weltweiten Gesundheit leisten kann.
"Warum sollten politische Entscheidungsträger überhaupt Einwänden Chinas Beachtung schenken?" fragte Alison Hsieh, Senior Nachforscherin für FAPA Europe. "China hat keine Glaubwürdigkeit in der WHO, da es seine eigenen SARS Ausbrüche verschleierte, was eine rapide Verbreitung der SARS Epidemie in andere Länder zur Folge hatte".
###
Über FAPA Europa:
FAPA Europa ist eine Europäische Organisation die europäisch-taiwanesische Beziehungen fördert und das Recht Taiwans auf Selbstbestimmung unterstützt.
Zur sofortigen Veröffentlichung
Dienstag der 8. mai 2007 Mainz Deutschland – Die Formosa Verein für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit Europa (FAPA Europa) fordert die volle Unterstützung der europäischen Union, von Taiwans WHO Mitgliedschaftsantrag bei der Welt-Gesundheitsversammlung in Genf nächste Woche. Taiwan, eine demokratische Nation mit 23 Millionen Menschen, die nicht in der WHO vertreten sind, wird ihren elften Versuch antreten um dieser internationalen Gesundheitsorganisation beizutreten.
"Der fortwährende Ausschluss Taiwans aus der WHO stellt ein gravierendes Gesundheitsrisiko für die Menschen auf der ganzen Welt dar" sagte Jenny Hsieh Sprecherin für FAPA Europa. "Es ist nicht akzeptabel, dass 23 Millionen taiwanesischen Bürgern der Zugang zu wesentlichen WHO Ressourcen verwehrt wird. Wenn die politischen Entscheidungsträger bei der Welt Gesundheitsversammlung ernsthaft die Verbreitung von Epidemien bekämpfen wollen, dann müssen sie Taiwan ohne zu zögern in die WHO aufnehmen."
Obwohl Taiwan zahlreiche Versuche gemacht hat, der WHO beizutreten, wurde der Antrag blockiert durch Einwände seitens Chinas. Der Ausschluss Taiwans hält seine Beamten davon ab direkte Informationen über Epidemien und Viren zu teilen, was verhinderte dass Taiwan Seuchenpräventionsstrategien mit der WHO während der SARS Epidemie 2003 koordinieren konnte.
"Dies ist eine Frage von fundamentalen Menschenrechten", fügte Hsieh hinzu. "Das Recht auf umfassende Gesundheit von 23 Millionen Taiwanesen überwiegt jeden politischen Einwand den China haben könnte".
Taiwanesische Beamte haben ihre Bereitschaft zum internationalen Bemühen für Prävention und Gesundheitsfürsorge bekundet. Mit aufgeklärten Ärzten, beständigen Beiträgen zur AIDS Prävention und Hilfe für Tsunami Opfer, hat Taiwan gezeigt, dass es einen wertvollen Beitrag zur weltweiten Gesundheit leisten kann.
"Warum sollten politische Entscheidungsträger überhaupt Einwänden Chinas Beachtung schenken?" fragte Alison Hsieh, Senior Nachforscherin für FAPA Europe. "China hat keine Glaubwürdigkeit in der WHO, da es seine eigenen SARS Ausbrüche verschleierte, was eine rapide Verbreitung der SARS Epidemie in andere Länder zur Folge hatte".
###
Über FAPA Europa:
FAPA Europa ist eine Europäische Organisation die europäisch-taiwanesische Beziehungen fördert und das Recht Taiwans auf Selbstbestimmung unterstützt.
L'AFAP Europe réclame le soutien de l'UE pour l'admission de Taïwan dans l'OMS
L'AFAP Europe réclame le soutien de l'UE pour l'admission de Taïwan dans l'OMS
Pour diffusion immédiate
Mardi, le 8 Mai 2007, Mayence, Allemagne - L'Association Formosane pour les Affaires Publiques (AFAP Europe) a réclamé le soutien de l'Union Européenne pour l'admission de Taïwan dans l'OMS à l'Assemblée Mondiale de la Santé la semaine prochaine à Genève. Taïwan, qui est une nation démocratique de 23 millions citoyens, n'est pas représentée dans l'OMS, et essayera de joindre cette organisation importante.
"L'exclusion de Taïwan de l'OMS est un danger grave pour tout le monde," a dit Jenny Hsieh, une porte-parole pour l'AFAP Europe. "C'est inacceptable que les 23 millions de citoyens de Taïwan se voient refusé l'accès aux ressources de l'OMS. Si les responsables de l'OMS veulent vraiment empêcher la diffusion des maladies, il faut tout de suite qu'ils permettent l'admission de Taïwan."
Même si Taïwan veut joindre l'OMS, la Chine empêche les demarches de Taïwan à tous les ans. L'exclusion de Taïwan ne permet pas la coopération entre les médicins taïwanais et les officiels de l'OMS. Ceci c'est même produit durant l'épidémie de SRAS en 2003.
"L'exclusion de Taïwan est un viol des droits de l'homme," a ajouté Hsieh. "Le droit universel à la santé des 23 millions de taïwanais est plus important que l'opposition déraisonnable de la Chine."
En dépit de son exclusion, Taïwan est en faveur d’une coopération internationale pour empêcher les épidémies. Avec un système médical sophistiqué, Taïwan peut contribuer efficacement aux efforts internationales contre les maladies.
"Même si la Chine s'oppose l'admission de Taïwan dans l'OMS, pourquoi l'UE devrait-elle s'incliner devant les autocrates de Pékin?" a demandé Alison Hsieh, une rechecheuse de l'AFAP Europe. "La Chine a exporté le SRAS au monde parce-qu'elle n'était pas honnête et a refusé de coopérer avec l'OMS."
###
À propos de l'AFAP Europe:
L'AFAP Europe est une organisation européenne qui promouvoit les rélations européennes-taiwanaises et soutient la souverainété et le droit d'autodétermination de Taïwan.
Pour diffusion immédiate
Mardi, le 8 Mai 2007, Mayence, Allemagne - L'Association Formosane pour les Affaires Publiques (AFAP Europe) a réclamé le soutien de l'Union Européenne pour l'admission de Taïwan dans l'OMS à l'Assemblée Mondiale de la Santé la semaine prochaine à Genève. Taïwan, qui est une nation démocratique de 23 millions citoyens, n'est pas représentée dans l'OMS, et essayera de joindre cette organisation importante.
"L'exclusion de Taïwan de l'OMS est un danger grave pour tout le monde," a dit Jenny Hsieh, une porte-parole pour l'AFAP Europe. "C'est inacceptable que les 23 millions de citoyens de Taïwan se voient refusé l'accès aux ressources de l'OMS. Si les responsables de l'OMS veulent vraiment empêcher la diffusion des maladies, il faut tout de suite qu'ils permettent l'admission de Taïwan."
Même si Taïwan veut joindre l'OMS, la Chine empêche les demarches de Taïwan à tous les ans. L'exclusion de Taïwan ne permet pas la coopération entre les médicins taïwanais et les officiels de l'OMS. Ceci c'est même produit durant l'épidémie de SRAS en 2003.
"L'exclusion de Taïwan est un viol des droits de l'homme," a ajouté Hsieh. "Le droit universel à la santé des 23 millions de taïwanais est plus important que l'opposition déraisonnable de la Chine."
En dépit de son exclusion, Taïwan est en faveur d’une coopération internationale pour empêcher les épidémies. Avec un système médical sophistiqué, Taïwan peut contribuer efficacement aux efforts internationales contre les maladies.
"Même si la Chine s'oppose l'admission de Taïwan dans l'OMS, pourquoi l'UE devrait-elle s'incliner devant les autocrates de Pékin?" a demandé Alison Hsieh, une rechecheuse de l'AFAP Europe. "La Chine a exporté le SRAS au monde parce-qu'elle n'était pas honnête et a refusé de coopérer avec l'OMS."
###
À propos de l'AFAP Europe:
L'AFAP Europe est une organisation européenne qui promouvoit les rélations européennes-taiwanaises et soutient la souverainété et le droit d'autodétermination de Taïwan.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Peut le Japon avoir confiance en Chine?
On dit que la visite du premier ministre Wen Jiabao de la Chine cette semaine au Japon est très important pour les relations entre les deux pays. Mais est-ce que le premier ministre du Japon, Shinzo Abe, peut vraiment avoir confiance en Chine?
Quoique la commerce augment entre la Chine et le Japon, Tokyo doit se souvenir que la Chine est une grande menace pour la paix et la démocratie en Asie. Les incursions militaires continuelles de la Chine, les grandes croissances du budget militaire, et le manque de la transparence de la Chine devraient faire souci pour Tokyo. Les responsables du Japon doivent se souvenir aussi, que les menaces de la Chine contre Taiwan, un pays démocratique, est une affaire grave qui peut déstabiliser le région.
Monsieur Abe, devrait s'apercevoir aussi, que la politique étrangère de la Chine soutient les dictatures, surtout la régime Kim Jong-Il en Corée-Nord, qui est le souci le plus perturbant du Japon.
Quoique le Japon voudrait améliorer les relations avec la Chine, il faut que le Japon ne se sacrifie pas la paix et la démocratie en Asie.
Quoique la commerce augment entre la Chine et le Japon, Tokyo doit se souvenir que la Chine est une grande menace pour la paix et la démocratie en Asie. Les incursions militaires continuelles de la Chine, les grandes croissances du budget militaire, et le manque de la transparence de la Chine devraient faire souci pour Tokyo. Les responsables du Japon doivent se souvenir aussi, que les menaces de la Chine contre Taiwan, un pays démocratique, est une affaire grave qui peut déstabiliser le région.
Monsieur Abe, devrait s'apercevoir aussi, que la politique étrangère de la Chine soutient les dictatures, surtout la régime Kim Jong-Il en Corée-Nord, qui est le souci le plus perturbant du Japon.
Quoique le Japon voudrait améliorer les relations avec la Chine, il faut que le Japon ne se sacrifie pas la paix et la démocratie en Asie.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Putin is one to talk...
Vladimir Putin has embarked on a decade old campaign to undermine human rights progress that has been painfully achieved in the Russian motherland. He has severely restricted press freedom, shutting down publications that are critical of his policies. State governers are no longer elected by the Russian people, but rather appointed by Putin himself.
Of course, under Putin's leadership, Russia uses its veto power to support the crazy Iranian regime, prop up genocide in Darfur, and undermine further democratic reforms in Eastern Europe.
Then Mr. Putin has the gall to criticize the US as a hyper-power intent on world domination and bending everything to its will. PLEASE! The US, with all its faults is a thousand times better on human rights issues than Russia. Rather than fear the US, perhaps we should be fearing the agenda of Vladamir Putin himself.
Of course, under Putin's leadership, Russia uses its veto power to support the crazy Iranian regime, prop up genocide in Darfur, and undermine further democratic reforms in Eastern Europe.
Then Mr. Putin has the gall to criticize the US as a hyper-power intent on world domination and bending everything to its will. PLEASE! The US, with all its faults is a thousand times better on human rights issues than Russia. Rather than fear the US, perhaps we should be fearing the agenda of Vladamir Putin himself.
USA: Die Nämensänderungen sind notwendig!
Ach, das Außenministerium der USA ist manchmal so heuchlerisch! Es ist gegen die Nämensänderungen der Taiwans Firmas. Sollen wir immer vorspielen, dass Taiwan wirklich China ist? Bitte sehr, diese Nämensänderungen von China bis Taiwan sind sehr überfällig! Ist das Postamt der USA ein Britisches Postamt? Sollen wir es "Britisches Postamt" rufen? Gar nichts! Das Postamt der USA ist ein amerikanisches Postamt.
Gleichfalls ist das Postamt in Taiwan nicht "Chunghwa Post". Das ist ein überaltertes Name von 60 Jahre vorher. Wir sollen es ein taiwanisches Postamt rufen. Diese Nämensänderung sind unterstützt von Taiwansmenschen!
Gleichfalls ist das Postamt in Taiwan nicht "Chunghwa Post". Das ist ein überaltertes Name von 60 Jahre vorher. Wir sollen es ein taiwanisches Postamt rufen. Diese Nämensänderung sind unterstützt von Taiwansmenschen!
L'hypocrisie des libéraux
Le parti libéral du Canada fait encore l'hypocrisie. Il condamne le gouvernement de Monsieur Harper, parce qu'il crois que M. Harper devrait parler doucement à la Chine de ses atrocités des droits de l'homme. Selon lui, M. Harper ne devrait pas faire mention de ces atrocités sans remords devant le média. Selon lui, M. Harper devrait imiter le gouvernement de Monsieur Chrétien et faire la diplomatie tranquille.
Ha ha ha, les libéraux sont une blague!
Quand est-ce que la diplomatie tranquille a réussi de:
1) empêcher l'accumlation des missiles contre Taiwan?
2) empêcher la massacre de Tiananmen en 1989?
3) empêcher la destruction de la cultur tibétaine?
4) empêcher la persécution des practiens de Falun Dafa?
Soyez pas si naïf, libéraux! La Chine est une danger vrai dans notre monde!
Ha ha ha, les libéraux sont une blague!
Quand est-ce que la diplomatie tranquille a réussi de:
1) empêcher l'accumlation des missiles contre Taiwan?
2) empêcher la massacre de Tiananmen en 1989?
3) empêcher la destruction de la cultur tibétaine?
4) empêcher la persécution des practiens de Falun Dafa?
Soyez pas si naïf, libéraux! La Chine est une danger vrai dans notre monde!
Friday, February 09, 2007
Stephen Harper stands up for human rights
Stephen Harper deserves a lot of credit for taking a principled stand against China's human rights abuses. Human rights are a basic Canadian value, and the Conservative government deserves our support for its principled stands, and its unwillingness to kowtow to a terrible Chinese regime that continues to ruthlessly oppress political dissent.
The Conservatives have shown courage for:
1) Supporting Taiwan's fledgling democracy and opposing China's military threats against Taiwan.
2) Supporting the Dalai Lama and Tibet's right to nationhood.
3) Pushing the Chinese government to allow religious freedom to Falun Dafa practitioners.
4) Standing up for Huseyin Celil, a Canadian citizen that is unfairly persecuted by China.
The Liberals never ever took such principled stands, and its clear that its the Conservatives that are the party that supports the promotion of human rights and democracy on the international stage.
The Conservatives have shown courage for:
1) Supporting Taiwan's fledgling democracy and opposing China's military threats against Taiwan.
2) Supporting the Dalai Lama and Tibet's right to nationhood.
3) Pushing the Chinese government to allow religious freedom to Falun Dafa practitioners.
4) Standing up for Huseyin Celil, a Canadian citizen that is unfairly persecuted by China.
The Liberals never ever took such principled stands, and its clear that its the Conservatives that are the party that supports the promotion of human rights and democracy on the international stage.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Chiang Kai-Sheks Denkmal: Lass uns in Frieden!
Manche Leute von der Demokratische Fortschrittspartei wollen dass Chiang Kai-Sheks Denkmal ist abgeschafft. Selbstverständlich! Warum hat das nicht schon passiert? Diese denkmal ist eine Beleidigung gegen die Menschen von Taiwan. So viele Leute hat wegen Chiang Kai-Shek gelitten.
Aber der KMT will diese Denkmal behalten....der KMT ist niemals mitfühlend mit den Menschen von Taiwan. Gibt es ein Denkmal von Hitler in Deutschland? Gar nichts!! Das ist undenkbar.....also, warum soll ein Chiang Kai-Sheks Denkmal in Taiwan bestehen? Wir mussen es beseitigen!
Aber der KMT will diese Denkmal behalten....der KMT ist niemals mitfühlend mit den Menschen von Taiwan. Gibt es ein Denkmal von Hitler in Deutschland? Gar nichts!! Das ist undenkbar.....also, warum soll ein Chiang Kai-Sheks Denkmal in Taiwan bestehen? Wir mussen es beseitigen!
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Returning
Flying high above the many peaks,
On a journey to our native land.
Remembering the times of our former lives,
Mindful of how things have changed.
Only compatriots might understand
Such a multitude of feeling,
As one who cries and laughs at once.
The arrival there is bittersweet,
As one who seems only a visitor.
Into the place we once called home,
Where familiar places become unfamiliar,
Aware of the regrettable fact,
Never to know home again.
On a journey to our native land.
Remembering the times of our former lives,
Mindful of how things have changed.
Only compatriots might understand
Such a multitude of feeling,
As one who cries and laughs at once.
The arrival there is bittersweet,
As one who seems only a visitor.
Into the place we once called home,
Where familiar places become unfamiliar,
Aware of the regrettable fact,
Never to know home again.
Friday, February 02, 2007
Hu Jintao et Soudan
Ah, notre ami, Hu Jintao visite maintainant le Soudan. Il veut donner l'aide de l'étranger de la Chine à Soudan. Ah, mais que fait-il, le Soudan, avec ces argents? Il va continuer à opprimer les gens de Darfur, et il va continuer à faire le génocide. C'est toujours la Chine qui soutienne les pays qui oppriment les droits de l'homme. Et les pays qui préservent ces droits ne vas jamais recevoir l'aide de l'étranger de la Chine! Pourquoi? Parce que la Chine elle-même veut opprimer ces droits. Si il y a de souffrance dans l'Afrique, la Chine est partiellement responsable!
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Die Lehrbücher in Taiwan
Taiwans Unterrichtungsministerium wird die Lehrbücher ändert. Diese Änderungsgrund sind sehr gut. Der Ministerium will heißt China als "China" und nicht "der Kontinent". Selbstverständlich! "Der Kontinent" ist nicht spezifisch....welche Kontinent meint man? Ist Nord Amerika oder Europa nicht auch "der Kontinent"?
Wir erwarten das der KMT wird klagen, der klagt immer wenn es die richtigen Änderungen gibt. Warum klagt er? Weil er denkt noch dass Taiwan noch zu China gehört. Und er denkt dass die Lehrer soll Chinas Geschichte lehren, nicht Taiwans. So komisch! Wenn wird der KMT die Wahrheit hinnehmen? Die Wirklichheit ist dass Taiwan ist sein eigene Land, aber der KMT will nicht es zustimmen.
Ach, und unser Freund Ma Ying-Jeou hat gesagt, er denkt diesen Änderungen sind parteipolitisch. Nee, Herr Ma. Eigentlich diesen Änderungen wollen die Wahrheit aussprechen. Wenn wir über die parteipolitischen Lehrbücher sprechen wollen, dann können wir die KMT Epocheslehrbücher schauen. Der KMT hat ganze Taiwan einer Gehirnwäsche unterziehen, und jetzt, wenn wir die richtigen Änderungen in die Lehrbücher machen wollen, dann klagt er immer!
Der KMT lebt immer in der Vergangenheit!
Wir erwarten das der KMT wird klagen, der klagt immer wenn es die richtigen Änderungen gibt. Warum klagt er? Weil er denkt noch dass Taiwan noch zu China gehört. Und er denkt dass die Lehrer soll Chinas Geschichte lehren, nicht Taiwans. So komisch! Wenn wird der KMT die Wahrheit hinnehmen? Die Wirklichheit ist dass Taiwan ist sein eigene Land, aber der KMT will nicht es zustimmen.
Ach, und unser Freund Ma Ying-Jeou hat gesagt, er denkt diesen Änderungen sind parteipolitisch. Nee, Herr Ma. Eigentlich diesen Änderungen wollen die Wahrheit aussprechen. Wenn wir über die parteipolitischen Lehrbücher sprechen wollen, dann können wir die KMT Epocheslehrbücher schauen. Der KMT hat ganze Taiwan einer Gehirnwäsche unterziehen, und jetzt, wenn wir die richtigen Änderungen in die Lehrbücher machen wollen, dann klagt er immer!
Der KMT lebt immer in der Vergangenheit!
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Die Insel
Die Insel ist wieder verlassen,
In der Welt wird sie nimmer passen,
Die Freiheit und Frieden zählen zu nichts,
Als jedermann vergißt sein Pflicht.
Wie kann die Inselsmenschen tun?
Denn gibt's keine Unterstützung,
Leben sie in Trauerspiel,
und leiden sie immer so viel.
In der Welt wird sie nimmer passen,
Die Freiheit und Frieden zählen zu nichts,
Als jedermann vergißt sein Pflicht.
Wie kann die Inselsmenschen tun?
Denn gibt's keine Unterstützung,
Leben sie in Trauerspiel,
und leiden sie immer so viel.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Mr. Ma, why won't you listen to the aspirations of the Taiwanese people?
Ah, good old 馬英九, your anti-democracy views show up again.
Mr. Ma has stated that the KMT will refuse to support Taiwanese independence no matter what. This comes as more and more people on Taiwan identify themselves as Taiwanese and aspire to be a nation apart from China. But of course, Mr. Ma has to kowtow to the KMT old guard, who ran Taiwan as a brutal dictatorship for over 40 long years. What a surprise! Mr. Ma will not heed to the will of the Taiwanese people, but would rather kowtow to the Chinese communists. Can we trust anyone from the KMT to stand up for Taiwan?
Apparently not....they haven't for 60 years, why should they start now?
Mr. Ma has stated that the KMT will refuse to support Taiwanese independence no matter what. This comes as more and more people on Taiwan identify themselves as Taiwanese and aspire to be a nation apart from China. But of course, Mr. Ma has to kowtow to the KMT old guard, who ran Taiwan as a brutal dictatorship for over 40 long years. What a surprise! Mr. Ma will not heed to the will of the Taiwanese people, but would rather kowtow to the Chinese communists. Can we trust anyone from the KMT to stand up for Taiwan?
Apparently not....they haven't for 60 years, why should they start now?
Formosa
Formosa, Formosa, the beautiful isle!
Thy beauty stretches on, mile after mile.
From the heights of thy mountains to thy coast by the sea,
Thou art a sight of true beauty, as grand as can be.
Home of my past, home to my blood,
Home of my fathers, whom tilled through thy mud.
I dream often, my friend, of returning to thee,
O glorious island, upon the blue sea.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to hear
The waves from the sea, that crash without fear
Upon thy coast, eroding the rocks to forge,
Such breathtaking views as Taroko Gorge.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to feel,
The wind off the ocean, the breeze so real,
Bringing welcome relief from thy insufferable heat,
A hint of coolness in summer, which nothing can beat.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to taste,
The food of thy night markets, prepared in haste,
Seafood and tofu, and other treats galore,
Cuisine so delicious, I crave always for more.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to smell,
The scent of tea leaves, which all can tell
Come from the hills above thy western plains,
Tea so fresh, that it brings thee worldwide fame.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to see,
The sun o'er thy mountains, as bright as can be.
Up so high and afar, I can breathe the fresh air,
Looking down at the plains, the view so fair.
Forever Formosa, may thou livest in peace.
Always Formosa, may thy spirit ne'er cease.
May freedom prevail on this glorious land,
May Formosans walk together, hand in hand.
Formosa, Formosa, no matter how long I stray,
Whether I must leave for a year or a day,
Formosa, my love, my heart lies with thee,
No matter how far I go, thou art always home to me.
Thy beauty stretches on, mile after mile.
From the heights of thy mountains to thy coast by the sea,
Thou art a sight of true beauty, as grand as can be.
Home of my past, home to my blood,
Home of my fathers, whom tilled through thy mud.
I dream often, my friend, of returning to thee,
O glorious island, upon the blue sea.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to hear
The waves from the sea, that crash without fear
Upon thy coast, eroding the rocks to forge,
Such breathtaking views as Taroko Gorge.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to feel,
The wind off the ocean, the breeze so real,
Bringing welcome relief from thy insufferable heat,
A hint of coolness in summer, which nothing can beat.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to taste,
The food of thy night markets, prepared in haste,
Seafood and tofu, and other treats galore,
Cuisine so delicious, I crave always for more.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to smell,
The scent of tea leaves, which all can tell
Come from the hills above thy western plains,
Tea so fresh, that it brings thee worldwide fame.
Formosa, Formosa, how I long to see,
The sun o'er thy mountains, as bright as can be.
Up so high and afar, I can breathe the fresh air,
Looking down at the plains, the view so fair.
Forever Formosa, may thou livest in peace.
Always Formosa, may thy spirit ne'er cease.
May freedom prevail on this glorious land,
May Formosans walk together, hand in hand.
Formosa, Formosa, no matter how long I stray,
Whether I must leave for a year or a day,
Formosa, my love, my heart lies with thee,
No matter how far I go, thou art always home to me.
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Amerika: Hast du nicht vorher für deine Unabhängigkeit gekämpft?
Manchmal gibt es einen Bericht, der sagt dass George W. Bush ist nicht zufrieden mit Chen Shui-bian. Wie so? Er will nicht dass Taiwan und Chen nach Unabhängigkeit treten. Aber Herr Präsident Bush, Sie müssen sich errinern, vorher hat Amerika seine Unabhängigkeit gegen Großbritannien gekämpft. Gabte es vorher eine Einzelbritannienspolitik? Aber Amerika hat für seine Freiheit, Demokratie, und Prinzipien gekämpft. Warum ist Bush gegen Taiwans Kampf für Freiheit, Demokratie, und Menschenrechten? Soll er nicht Taiwansunabhängigkeit hinnehmen? Ist Taiwanslage zur Zeit nicht gleich Amerika in 1776? Also, wir sollen die Einzelchinaspolitik abschaffen!
Amerika: Du sollst Taiwansbemühung unbedingt unterstützen!
Amerika: Du sollst Taiwansbemühung unbedingt unterstützen!
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Mme Royal, est-que vous allez garder votre promis?
Ségolène Royal, souvenez-vous vos mots. Vous avez dit, "Comme dans toute démocratie, le peuple qui vote est souverain et libre et donc les Québécois décideront librement de leur destin". Oui, peut-être, vous avez raison, les Québécois devraient décider leur destin et leur avenir. Mais souvenez-vous qu'il y a déja deux fois en 1980 et 1995 quand les Québécois ont décidé à rester dans le Canada. Et si vous devenez le premier-ministre de la France, souvenez-vous bien ces mots. Parce que Taiwan est une démocratie, alors les Taiwanais devraient décider leur destin et leur avenir. Ce n'est pas la choix de la Chine. Vous ne pouvez pas encore adhérer à la politique d'une seule Chine. Les Taiwanais ne veulent pas joindre la Chine. Ce serait une mauvaise choix, parce que la Chine opprime toujours les droits de l'homme......
Ist Glaubesfreiheit wichtig für den Vatikan?
Der Vatikan ist bereitwillig, die diplomatischen Beziehungen mit Taiwan zu beenden. Wie so? Er will mit China die Beziehungen einrichten. Hat der Vatikan schon vergessen, dass China kein Respekt für die Glaubesfreiheit hat? Taiwan beachtet immer Glaubesfreiheit und Religionsrechten. Warum ist der Vatikan so bereitwillig, Taiwan zu verlassen? Der Papst, hat er wirklich keinen Prinzipien? Wird er seine Seele verkaufen wegen China? Ich dachte dass er die Freiheit und Rechten respektieren....offentsichtlich war ich unrichtig. Ich finde es sehr schade, dass der Vatikan unterstützt die Glaubesfreiheit nicht mehr.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
America! While China undermines your aims, Taiwan is a reliable ally!
The bureaucrats in the State Department and the Bush administration should pay special heed to a policy document excellently written by John Tkacik Jr.
If the US really wants a cooperative ally that will stand up for true peace, liberty, justice and democracy in East Asia, then it needs to drastically tilt its foreign policy away from China and towards Taiwan. China consistently undermines US aims and goals, while Taiwan is a staunch ally of US interests and respects fundmental rights and freedoms of all peoples.
Heritage Foundation Policy Paper
If the US really wants a cooperative ally that will stand up for true peace, liberty, justice and democracy in East Asia, then it needs to drastically tilt its foreign policy away from China and towards Taiwan. China consistently undermines US aims and goals, while Taiwan is a staunch ally of US interests and respects fundmental rights and freedoms of all peoples.
Heritage Foundation Policy Paper
Europa: Warum unterstützt du nicht Demokratie und Menschenrechten?
Ach, manchmal ist Europa wirklich so feig! Es schlägt wieder die Prinzipien zu unterstützen ab. Diese mal, Taiwan hat Europa gefragt ob es seine Weltgesundheitsorganisationsbieten helfen kann. Europa hat Angst über China, also hat es abgeschlagt. Sehr schade....hoffentlich Europa wird im Zukunft die Menschenrechten zu unterstützen lernen. Sei nicht immer feig!!
Taipei Times Zeitungsartikel
Taipei Times Zeitungsartikel
Nationhood
The yearning of a people, 'tis a frightful thing to hear,
from an island far away, with a history of tears.
The cries, they go unnoticed, though they echo through the night,
while the world turns away, indifferent to such plight.
"Hear us!" shout the people, "A Nation we would be!"
But the world hears a song, in an entirely different key,
"No no," replies the world, "This cannot be allowed,"
And not a single party dares go against the crowd.
The people of the island, patient as can be,
have overcome oppression, defeated tyranny.
A society they have built, out of love and out of life,
But a monster looms in shadows, and sows the strait with strife.
The monster will destroy what is just and what is right,
And each party fears this monster with its growing might,
Who dares offend the monster, who dares to stop the cries?
Who dares to help the island, who dares confront the lies?
The world remains unfriendly, such an unfair place,
It willfully ignores justice when it calls upon its face.
And the island is rejected, left helplessly to tread
upon its own in darkness, while the world is misled.
So the yearning will go on, who knows when it will cease?
As the people are abandoned, and unrighteousness increased.
But hope lies in justice, our nationhood will come,
'Tis on that very day, our fight, we will have won.
from an island far away, with a history of tears.
The cries, they go unnoticed, though they echo through the night,
while the world turns away, indifferent to such plight.
"Hear us!" shout the people, "A Nation we would be!"
But the world hears a song, in an entirely different key,
"No no," replies the world, "This cannot be allowed,"
And not a single party dares go against the crowd.
The people of the island, patient as can be,
have overcome oppression, defeated tyranny.
A society they have built, out of love and out of life,
But a monster looms in shadows, and sows the strait with strife.
The monster will destroy what is just and what is right,
And each party fears this monster with its growing might,
Who dares offend the monster, who dares to stop the cries?
Who dares to help the island, who dares confront the lies?
The world remains unfriendly, such an unfair place,
It willfully ignores justice when it calls upon its face.
And the island is rejected, left helplessly to tread
upon its own in darkness, while the world is misled.
So the yearning will go on, who knows when it will cease?
As the people are abandoned, and unrighteousness increased.
But hope lies in justice, our nationhood will come,
'Tis on that very day, our fight, we will have won.
Friday, January 19, 2007
Europa muss die Waffenembargo gegen China behalten
Die Europäische Union muss die Waffenembargo gegen China behalten. Das ist sehr klar. Warum gibt es eine Waffenembargo? Weil China die Menschenrechten zu unterdrücken fortfährt. Ist die Lage jetzt besser als 1989? Überhaupt nicht! China hat noch etwa 800 Flugkörper gegenüber Taiwan. Und China zerstört noch die Rechten in Tibet. China respekt nicht Frieden. Europa muss unterstützt die Menschenrechten überall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)