Taiwan Matters! The PRC flag has never flown over Taiwan, and don't you forget it!

"Taiwan is not a province of China. The PRC flag has never flown over Taiwan."

Stick that in your clipboards and paste it, you so-called "lazy journalists"!

Thanks to all those who voted for Taiwan Matters!
in the Taiwanderful Best Taiwan Blog Awards 2010!
You've got great taste in blogs!

Saturday, May 01, 2010

permalink

How the ISO helps China change Taiwan's status quo

A harmful meme which replicates itself with ease
Many organizations, corporations, governments claim that they are "apolitical" and that they simply use the "standard" International Organization for Standardization (ISO) country codes as a guide to determine how they list Taiwan.

The problem with this is that in the ISO country names and code elements list, Taiwan's "short form" is given as "Taiwan, Province of China." This name is neither short nor does it reflect Taiwan's de facto independent status.

However, it does function as a "meme" or "verbal virus."

Furthermore, the ISO has also listed Taiwan as China's Region 7, basically ignoring Taiwan's de facto status and annexing the smaller country to the larger one.

This is outrageous!

No, it's not enough for the 50 Cent Army to dominate the Internet with pro-CCP/China/anti-Taiwan propaganda -- now the ISO is helping China to annex Taiwan by spreading the standardized-coding "virus" around the globe.

This "virus" created by the UN Statistical Division (which is under the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs [UNDESA] has been headed by Chinese official Sha Zukang since July 1, 2007) was designed to annex Taiwan by using the convenient excuse of ISO "standardization" codes, which are used by many businesses. On many university advertisements for recruiting international students on the Internet, Taiwan has been erroneously listed as a "province of China" most likely due to this ISO country code "virus."

Background
Readers who are unfamiliar with the following subjects might want to take a look at the links below before continuing:
* ISO 3166 FAQs
* ISO 3166-1 (scroll down to "Criteria for inclusion")
* ISO 3166-3
* UN Report of the Working Group on Country Names

Since Taiwan's application to enter the United Nations was rejected by UN in July 2007, not being a UN member, Taiwan is not listed in the United Nations Bulletin Country Names.

The UN Terminology Section is the current authority on country names in all of the official languages of the UN, and it does not have Taiwan listed.

The list of names in Country and Region Codes for Statistical Use of the UN Statistics Division is based on the Bulletin Country Names and other UN sources, the name "Taiwan, Province of China" has obviously come from "other UN sources."

What are these so-called "other UN sources"?

The UN always cites UN Resolution 2758 as "proof" that Taiwanese people should not have their own seat at the UN because it interprets this resolution as meaning that "Taiwan is a province of China" and that Taiwanese people should therefore be represented by the Chinese government -- a government that has never governed Taiwan and has not even been chosen by its own people to represent China through democratic elections.

UN Resolution 2758 actually resolves the question of who should represent China, but it mentions nothing about who should represent the 23 million people of Taiwan.

On the contrary, the Standard country or area codes and geographical regions for statistical use has included this:
The designations employed and the presentation of material at this site do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
Read that again: The designations do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever concerning the legal status or delineation of frontiers or boundaries of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities. The UN terribly contradicts itself by doing those very things when it wrongly interprets Taiwan's status as being part of China (citing UN Resolution 2758 as the authoritative source), but the UN Secretariat also declares that it has no opinion on the legal status of any country.

How ridiculous!

The freedom to speak the truth
But Taiwan is a country, says a geographic expert who does not work for any UN organizations and who can therefore speak the truth. There is no doubt whatsoever that Taiwan fulfills all the criteria for a country. The only reason Taiwan isn't a member in the UN is the political pressure from China, a country which frequently reminds the world that it doesn't rule out the use of force in order to annex Taiwan as one of its provinces.

Logical breakdown
Many countries existed long before the creation of the UN. If a country decides not to join the UN as a member, it does not mean this country doesn't exist. (See also: this comment by Andrew Kerslake.) In other words, it's not up to the UN to determine whether a territory is indeed a country. It can only decide whether it wishes to accept the application of a country which decides to join and either welcome them or not.

Many countries represented in the UN are led by authoritarian governments which have not gained their rule via any democratic elections at home. Consequently, the UN has many problems, and its original mission of promoting world peace has not been fulfilled.

The UN has no rights (see reference number 2 below, regarding MOU) to sign any memo against a non-member state (such as the WHO's secret MOU with China which says that communications between the WHO and Taiwan be routed through China), nor to arbitrarily change a country's name because of pressure from another bullying state.

The Taiwanese people had a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration imposed upon them. They've experienced the KMT's 228 Massacre, and they've suffered under the suppression of White Terror and the longest period of martial law in modern history. Taiwan's gradual transition to democracy requires further support from strong democratic nations.

Taiwan's people want a new Taiwan constitution to replace the flawed ROC constitution (promulgated 63 years ago in a foreign country) so that the occupying administrator's rules of law can be declared obsolete, and its legislature can function normally through fair elections. Otherwise, committees such as the Legislative Yuan's Procedural Committee (because of this pan-blue dominated committee's arbitrary prioritization of proposed bills, certain important bills are purposely delayed or blocked completely from being included in the agenda for discussion), the Executive Yuan's Referendum Review Committee, the unconstitutional National Communications Commission (NCC), and others will continue to hinder Taiwan's full democratic reform.

The controversies of a rising undemocratic China and the business opportunities there have put Taiwan's democracy in jeopardy. Once Taiwan is taken into the sphere sucked into the black hole of an authoritarian China, the rest of the neighboring region will be in danger.

The UN's geographic "experts" have simply ignored Taiwan's de facto status and have helped their Chinese chief of UNDESA to achieve his country's agenda by spreading the ISO country code "virus" around the global business community, using this so called "standard" code to shift the status quo towards China's favor. This calls their professional ethics and expertise into question.

If the UN is serious about the promotion of human rights and human dignity, its geographic "experts" should be investigated for giving in to "pressure" from above, and the UNDESA head, Sha Zukang, should be probed for "incompetence" and for his role in helping the spread of the Taiwan ISO country code "virus" around the globe.

Suggested actions
Since the ROC has never been recognized as having taken over Formosa's sovereignty, any Taiwanese organization(s) with sufficient financial resources should sue the ISO. If the ISO is as innocent as it claims to be and merely updates their records by "default" (i.e., transferring UN "expert advise"), then there is no need for the ISO to exist at all. Since the ISO's mission is to standardize things, they shouldn't just follow orders from other "experts" without judging or adding its own input; otherwise, they are no experts themselves.

Since freedom of expression should be encouraged in universities, Taiwanese studying abroad or planning to do so can also help out when discovering errors about how Taiwan is listed. Write (politely) to school officials letting them know that such errors are offensive, and ask them to label your home country in a way which reflects Taiwan's de facto status.

USCIS: preserving the truth, setting the right "standard"
The US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is not ambiguous about Taiwan's status. It is a US executive branch that honors Taiwanese people's right to call their country "Taiwan." In an official memorandum dated December 1, 2008 [62 KB PDF], it states that for purposes of the United States immigration law, Taiwan is to be considered a separate independent country despite the Department of State's "one-China" policy.

Consequently, a United States passport may not be issued showing its owner's place of birth as "Taiwan, China," "Taiwan, Republic of China," or "Taiwan ROC." For post-WWII immigrants to Taiwan who were born in China, it should show "People's Republic of China" as their country of birth; however, their country of nationality (on application form N-400) should still be listed as "Taiwan" as explained below.

Here's an excerpt from the memo:
The adjudicator must not require an applicant to list "Taiwan, PRC," "Taiwan, China," "Taiwan, Republic of China," "Taiwan, ROC," or "People's Republic of China" as the country of birth or nationality on Form N-400 if the applicant has indicated "Taiwan" and the documentary evidence submitted supports their claim.

[...]

Note that some applicants may have been born in the PRC but currently hold a
Taiwan passport because they moved from the mainland (PRC) to Taiwan long ago.
For those applicants, the country of birth should be listed as "People's Republic of
China" and the country of nationality should be listed as "Taiwan" on their
Form N-400.
Reference:
1. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) - an agency affiliated with the US Department of Commerce, after consulting with the American Institute in Taiwan, has stopped referring to Taiwan as "Chinese Taipei" and refers to Taiwan simply by its proper name: Taiwan.

2. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) should involve the mutual benefits of the signing parties only. It should contain nothing about a third party -- that is, it shouldn't involve anyone outside of the negotiation process.

3. When it comes to Taiwan, National Geographic is "NG".

(Tim Maddog edited this post)

Labels: , , , , , ,

__________________________________________________

Thursday, May 21, 2009

permalink

Video of Taiwanese beauties in Geneva -- UNCUT

Who loves Taiwan, crybaby?

WHO's reckless and disgraceful and causing Taiwan to lose face? That would be the Minister of Health Yeh Ching-chuan (葉金川).

What happened? Some Taiwanese students studying in Europe, including Huang Hai-ning (黃海寧) -- the good-looking 30-year-old who is a PhD candidate in France and the daughter of former Taichung County councilor Huang Pin-huang (黃丙煌) (DPP) -- caught up with Yeh in Geneva and wanted to make sure he wouldn't sell out Taiwan to China.

They had a pretty good reason to worry.

Taiwan is already listed as "China (Province of Taiwan)" on the World Health Organization (WHO) web site -- clearly the result of a 2005 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed between China and the WHO. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) implausibly denies having any knowledge of this MOU.

It's more than just "implausible." Chang Jung-Kung (張榮恭), then-spokesman and director of the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT -- y'know, Ma's party?) department of mainland China affairs said that he had "obtained the contents of the memorandum through China's relevant institutions in charge of Taiwan affairs," according to a May 29, 2005 CNA article republished on GlobalSecurity.org.

Getting back to the events at hand, Huang repeatedly asked Yeh what name Taiwan would be using at the World Health Assembly (WHA), but Yeh refused to give a direct answer to any of her questions. He could only shout insults and try to run away. Eventually, he made his way to a waiting vehicle and took off.

Can you guess what happened just a short time later?

Yeh held a press conference and... cried! zOMFG!!!!111!

What Luby said
Instead of trying to describe my own incredulous reaction to this scene, let me just quote something I received in the mail today which says it much better than I could [from Luby Liao's blog, presented here with minor edits]:
Some thoughts:
1. [Yeh] could not talk coherently.
Student: What title are we using to participate in the WHA?

Yeh: Please have self-respect... Can you speak Taiwanese? ... We must have dignity... What do you want?... Why do I need to answer your question?... I love Taiwan....
2. Not only did he NOT answer legitimate and intelligent questions, he mumbled irrelevant (We must have dignity) and offensive (Why do I need to answer citizens' questions?) gibberish.

3. He became foul-mouthed, using language[] that made me shudder.

4. Michael Turton: Afterwards he convened an instant press conference (using taxpayers' money), where he sniffled and whimpered. He never answered the question: What title are we using to participate in the WHA?
Isn't a Minister supposed to be an outstanding citizen, capable, ethical and patriotic? Why is this Minister incoherent, evil, and openly selling out his country?
Take a look at the 5-minute video, with no edits, and see everything the pro-blue media left out:


5:01 YouTube video: "葉金川失控飆罵愛國學生 保證一刀未剪完整版"
Translation: Yeh Ching-chuan loses control, unleashes a whirlwind of abusive
language when confronted by patriotic students: the complete, uncensored version


I hereby declare Huang Hai-ning a National Treasure!


The same footage can be seen here with Hanzi subtitles added and a discussion by the Talking Show (大話新聞) panel:


10:36 YouTube video: "09-05/19 SET-大話新聞( DaHwa News)14/6"
Translation: May 19, 2009, SET Talking Show, part 6 of 14 [of that evening's show]

If anybody finds a version with English subtitles, let me know so I can share it with readers who might not understand the Mandarin and Taiwanese in the ones above.

FURTHER READING:
* In today's Taipei Times, Yeh's 'heckler' shares her story

Supermodels and douchebags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

__________________________________________________

Saturday, May 02, 2009

permalink

Ma Ying-jeou's spokesman deviates from truth again

... or should I say "is still doing so"?

Answering a question from an Associated Press reporter about a 2005 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the World Health Organization (WHO) and the People's Republic of China (PRC), Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) had this to say (paraphrased here in the pro-unification China Times [中國時報], translation mine):
是否有這份備忘錄,從未獲得證實 [...]

The existence of this MOU hasn't yet been confirmed.
For them to not know about this MOU could only be the result of pure willful ignorance.

Read this, and know more than they (say they) do
The Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) has posted the text of a WHO document titled "Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the WHO Secretariat and China" online where the whole world (except for the Ma administration?) can read it. The document refers to Taiwan by the bizarre name of "Taiwan, China." Since the MOU was signed with the PRC, it doesn't require logical superpowers to deduce that they don't mean "Taiwan, ROC."

Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the WHO Secretariat and China, Page 1
Page 1
Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the WHO Secretariat and China, Page 2
Page 2
Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the WHO Secretariat and China, Page 3
Page 3
Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the WHO Secretariat and China, Page 4
Page 4
Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the WHO Secretariat and China, Page 5
Page 5
Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the WHO Secretariat and China, Page 6
Page 6

Click thumbnails to enlarge
(I've re-uploaded the pages to a
server separate from FAPA's)

CleverClaire has links to several documents hosted on Google Docs which are related to the Ma administration's belittling of Taiwan's sovereignty, including a text-based version of the one linked in image form above. That document contains this:
7. Participation by Taiwanese medical and public health experts in technical activities is subject to the following conditions:
* The experts shall participate in their personal capacity. When designations are used (e.g. on conference badges or list of participants), reference shall be made to "Taiwan, China";
Then-PRC Minister of Health Gao Qiang (高強) also discussed the existence of the MOU in the Chinese media and elsewhere in May 2005. "Unconfirmed"? 才怪!

And, wait just a minute! Didn't Ma's Minister of Health, Yeh Ching-chuan (葉金川), claim that they "broke through" the "Taiwan, China" formula of the MOU? [alt. link] Sounds to me an awful lot like they did know.

Truly, madly...
Really -- can the Ma administration be trusted about anything, much less with Taiwan's sovereignty?

Ma Ying-jeou has changed the status quo. Why isn't the US State Department raising a stink? Oh, that's right. All that stuff about the previous president's "changing" of the status quo was but a ruse.

FURTHER READING:
* Check out Jerome F. Keating, PhD's latest: "Dumb and Dumber, the Naming of Chinese Taipei and its Acceptance."

* An article in today's Taipei Times reveals contradictions between the statements of Minister of Health Yeh and WHO spokesman Thomas Abraham.

* Michael Turton has a discussion of swine flu, er, H1N1, uh, swine flu "fever" with news of a new test kit developed in Taiwan and links to related discussions by CFR and Bruce Jacobs. My wife has also scoured local pharmacies and been unable to purchase protective masks at any of them. The much higher-priced ones that can be found in convenience stores are the only ones that seem to be currently available.

Temporary participants: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

__________________________________________________