The Geopolitical Streisand Effect: The More China And The WHO Try To Silence Taiwan, The More Attention Its Success Fighting COVID-19 Gets
from the streisanding-taiwan dept
Last week, a full page advertisement appeared in the NY Times, that was crowdfunded by nearly 27,000 people (mostly from Taiwan), with the provocative line: "WHO can help? Taiwan." Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen posted a picture to her Facebook page:
The story behind the ad and the companion TaiwanCanHelp.US website is quite fascinating in its own right, and is reflective of the impressive digitally-aware political movement that has really grown up in Taiwan over the last decade. If you're unaware, over the last five years or so, Taiwan has been perhaps the most interesting experiment to watch in using technology to build more effective participatory government, pushed forward by a bunch of open source/open government activists who realized that working towards real solutions rather than pure partisan rancor, was a good way forward. And that shows in how this new campaign came about.
Much of it was designed in response to the WHO's continued efforts to box Taiwan out of the COVID-19 conversation, even as Taiwan seemed to be one of a very small number of countries which appeared to be dealing with the onslaught of COVID-19 quite well (and this was despite its closeness to China, and many people regularly travelling back and forth between Taiwan and China). The WHO's efforts to ignore Taiwan went really viral in late March when a major news program in Hong Kong, RTHK, interviewing Assistant Director-General at WHO Bruce Aylward, showed Aylward's ridiculously awkward attempts to avoid responding to questions about Taiwan:
‼️WOW‼️ Bruce Aylward/@WHO did an interview with HK's @rthk_news & when asked about #Taiwan he pretended not to hear the question. The journalist asks again & he hangs up!
She calls back & he said "Well, we've already talked about China."
ENJOY+SHARE THE MADNESS! #CoronaVirus pic.twitter.com/jgpHRVHjNX
— 😷Hong Kong World City 🖐🏻☔️ (@HKWORLDCITY) March 28, 2020
The reporter asks whether or not the WHO would reconsider Taiwan's membership. Because Taiwan is not a member of the UN (because China still insists it's a "rogue province" rather than an independent country), it is not a member of the WHO and has to petition to attend meetings -- which is sometimes allowed, but frequently denied. Aylward first stares in silence, and then when asked again says he couldn't hear the question. She tries to ask again and he says "no, that's okay, let's move to another question." But the reporter asks again, and suddenly the Skype session "disconnects" (though you see Aylward move a bit right before the disconnect happens). The reporter calls him again, and this time instead of asking about WHO membership, just asks about how Taiwan has done regarding containing COVID-19. Aylward then gives a cringe-worthy response obviously trying not to respond to the actual question:
Well, we've already talked about China. And, you know, when you look across all the different areas of China, they've actually all done quite a good job.
And then he quickly ends the interview. But of course, much of China has not done a very good job at all, while Taiwan, which (contrary to what the Chinese will claim) is not a part of China has done a very good job. And that's kind of important. To make matters worse, the news station that aired the interview was reprimanded by Hong Kong officials which, of course drew even more attention to not just the interview, but the overall situation.
As a recent piece by Thomas Shattuck at the Foreign Policy Research Institute notes, this kicked off a Streisand Effect for Taiwan's successful handling of the pandemic, bringing a ton of new attention on the country.
The video interview went viral because it showed the embarrassing lengths that the WHO goes to in order to avoid offending China. Throughout the crisis, the WHO has been extremely laudatory of China’s response and transparency to the virus outbreak—despite obvious early cover-ups.
Even though Beijing has tried to erase Taiwan from the COVID-19 conversation, the world is paying attention. Bill Gates, when interviewed on Fox News, pointed to Taiwan’s early testing and extensive procedures, and explained that because of testing, it will not experience as much of an economic hit as other countries. American politicians from both sides of the aisle also highlight Taiwan as a country to emulate. European politicians have joined the call for Taiwan’s inclusion in the WHO. Googling Taiwan brings up positive search results.
No matter how much China seeks to push Taiwan down, Taiwan continues to show its resilience. It has not been erased.
Amusingly, Shattuck also highlights that Barbra Streisand herself weighed in with support for Taiwan's response to COVID-19, bringing it all full-circle.
After this all went viral, the director of the WHO, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, made things much worse by accusing Taiwan of being behind racist attacks and death threats directed at himself... which did not go over well at all. The big NY Times ad actually began as a response to Dr. Tedros' weird attack on Taiwan, but those behind it quickly realized that simply responding angrily to a weird national ad hominem attack would likely escalate things, rather than trying to approach the campaign by highlighting not just the successful results in Taiwan, but also how Taiwan can help others survive the pandemic:
“We only wanted to respond to Dr. Tedros’s false accusations when we released our first draft of the public letter, but as everyone could see a few days ago, we had a lot to improve upon,” Du wrote in an online forum today reflecting on the publication process.
The organizers eventually rewrote the draft to reflect what Taiwan has always promoted, using “Taiwan can help” to signal empathy for victims of the crisis.
“In the end, we realized we don’t have to play tit for tat with Tedros. We should rise above it and just reiterate #TaiwanCanHelp properly,” Du wrote.
And, to some extent, this goes back to what I noted up top about Taiwan's embrace of openness and transparency (often via the internet). Indeed, the TaiwanCanHelp website discusses information sharing and open data that Taiwan is willing to share:
In the end, the WHO's terrible attempt to ignore Taiwan has, as Shattuck noted, only called much more attention to Taiwan and its efforts. The country's President has recently written a column for Time Magazine explaining how Taiwan handled COVID-19 and the Washington Post recently stated what should be obvious by now, that everyone -- especially China and the WHO -- need to get over their politicking over the sovereignty of Taiwan and let the country join the WHO, because saving lives right now is a hell of a lot more important than continuing this silly political charade.
Today, Taiwan’s contribution to the fight against covid-19 has been publicly recognized by Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, and Shinzo Abe, prime minister of Japan. State Department officials have conducted high-level virtual briefings with Taiwanese epidemiologists and government officials. U.S. officials have praised Taiwan for sending millions of masks to the United States. But, true to form, China has reacted in typically small-minded and aggressive manner, accusing Taiwan of engaging in “mask diplomacy” and seeking to profit from the pandemic to push its independence agenda.
As that article notes, if China wants to continue its silly politicking there's at least another fig leaf it can put over this situation to make it more bearable -- and it has done so in the past:
Beijing won’t be happy, but there is a model for this. In 2001, China entered the World Trade Organization. Literally five minutes after Beijing’s formal accession to the trading body, Taiwan was allowed in under the name “Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (Chinese Taipei).” Taiwan won entry to the WTO because of pressure by the United States and other major trading nations, which told Beijing not to mess around. The global trading system was considered too important to let it be held hostage by Beijing.
I think a strong case can be made that global health in the midst of a pandemic is more important than "global trading systems." As Shattuck notes, for now, Taiwan needs to separately apply to attend each and every WHO meeting, and its requests are frequently denied:
Despite its stellar response and goodwill campaign, Taiwan has been curtailed by the WHO. The WHO has claimed that it is working with Taiwan and its government, but that is not really the case. According Legislator Wang Ting-yu, Taiwan applied to attend 187 WHO technical meetings between 2009 and 2019, but only was allowed to attend 57. Since Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations, it is not granted permission to attend every meeting—it must ask permission to attend as a guest/observer, which means that China must give the WHO, other any other UN-affiliated organization, its blessing to allow Taiwan’s presence. Most importantly, Taiwan was the first country to ask the WHO whether or not the virus could be transmitted human-to-human on December 31. The WHO ignored Taiwan’s question. On January 12 (the day after Taiwan’s presidential election), the WHO said that there was no clear evidence, and then on January 20, China confirmed human-to-human transmission—almost one month after Taiwan first brought up the very important question.
That issue with that initial email in December has also turned into yet another sort of Streisanding. The WHO came out last week denying that it ignored Taiwan's email and claiming that the email did not indicate human-to-human transmission of the disease. Except that the Taiwanese government responded and had receipts in the form of the email it sent:
The facts regarding Taiwan’s email to alert WHO to possible danger of #COVID19#email內容 #TaiwanCanHelp #TaiwanIsHelping @WHO
英文新聞稿：https://t.co/AvyHulhrlU pic.twitter.com/nYvmY4R2ao
— MOHW of Taiwan (@MOHW_Taiwan) April 11, 2020
While the email does not explicitly state person-to-person transmission, the very fact that they told the WHO that these individuals were being isolated clearly was an indication that they were concerned about person-to-person transmission. More importantly, as the Taiwanese government points out, part of its early success in stopping a massive outbreak was merely assuming that it was likely there was person-to-person transmission -- something the WHO didn't admit for almost another month:
Even though Taiwan strongly suspected that human-to-human transmission of the disease was already occurring at the time, we were unable to gain confirmation through existing channels. Therefore, on the day the aforementioned email was sent to WHO, the Taiwan government activated enhanced border control and quarantine measures based on the assumption that human-to-human transmission was in fact occurring. These measures included screening passengers on flights from Wuhan prior to disembarkation.
We've talked a lot about the problems of general Chinese censorship in the time of COVID, but it's been incredible to watch this moment of geopolitical Streisanding in which the efforts by the Chinese and the WHO to stick their collective heads in the sand over Taiwan is only serving to highlight the details of Taiwan's success even more.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: attention, censorship, china, covid-19, openness, streisand effect, taiwan, transparency, who
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Well, we know who holds their leash I guess...
As desperate attempts to brush something under the rug 'technical' difficulties immediately after a 'problematic' question and then pretending that they'd already answered the question afterwards is just sad.
As bad as the WHO leadership came out looking from that I gotta say, looks like China was so desperate to save face that they instead shot themselves in the foot again. Acting like petty little children during a global crisis by refusing to let a country that's apparently been doing an excellent job dealing with the crisis membership in a group that is supposed to be worried about health is just beyond pathetic, and shows yet against that they are willing to put their power and image ahead of the lives of those around them, which is not the greatest look during an emergency to say the least.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There has been a lot of pro-WHO defense going on in the news lately, mostly involving Trump's withdrawal of financial support for the organization. He's been trying, inappropriately, to deflect responsibility for his late reaction to the virus to the WHO. We all know that's garbage but wow, the WHO kinda deserved it. I have to say that I hope any sitting president would have done the same wrt withdrawing support (not wrt failing their country by reacting far too late to be effective).
One can only hope that this Chinese gov't escapade highlights how badly China has acted in this and all other things and brings down their global influence. Perhaps that is what will finally force a change in their government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Saying “the W.H.O. failed and it will need to rebuild trust, but the organization is still a valuable resource that we hope will learn from this and do better in the future” is one thing. Saying “the W.H.O. failed and we should therefore entirely defund and cease any partnership with the organization immediately and without reservation because of that failure” is an entirely different ballgame. Try and guess which position belongs to Donald Trump.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Is it really still a valuable resource if it lies to us at the behest of a country like China? I think not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The W.H.O. can still be a valuable resource. Defunding and ignoring the organization entirely robs any country that does so of whatever expertise and information that the W.H.O. has to offer. And despite its lying on behalf of China, the organization still has plenty of both expertise and information that countries could definitely use right now — especially a country run by a administration that (and a man who) continually displays a stunning level of incompetence on a daily basis.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's not really true. The WHO is funded by other countries, too. The US funding alone won't shut down the WHO and their information of questionable value will continue to be disseminated to those countries (at their peril).
Trump would have failed with or without accurate information from the WHO but that doesn't excuse their incompetence (and certainly not his).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Except if you are worried about China dominating the institution then the US pulling their support and funding will obviously help with that.
The US' lack of engagement with the UN and other international bodies (always an issue but exacerbated under Trump) is what has been giving China the chance to build up all that power and leverage in the first place...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Is it really still a valuable President if it lies to us?
ftfy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Huh Taiwan-China is arguing about the UN again. That's usually the fastest way to become a party to it.
Good luck with that ineffective organization.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If it's so ineffective then why does China want so badly to remain a part of it? How many have avoided death thanks to the UN in poor and war-torn countries? How is the UN "ineffective"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Taiwan and the UN
Taiwan lost its UN seat many years ago.
It's a province of China to which a civil war thug fled and where his thuggish descendants are still holed up.
China represents it in the UN and its agencies. Get over it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Taiwan and the UN
Let's see... that's four comments from this brand new account, all repeating Chinese government propaganda talking points.
I hope you got your 50 cents. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Taiwan and the UN
...and, according to Mike, posted from an asian proxy account to boot.
I guess we can confirm that the pathetically obvious astroturfer trolling for the PRC in the best style of classical old USSR-style propaganda may in fact be a bona fide member of his imperial majesty, Xi's public relations department.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Taiwan and the UN
Get off the genocide train and bring it into 2020 not 1950.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Taiwan and the UN
Taiwan is the last remnant of the pre-communist government of China-in-exile.
The only reason Taiwan is not a UN member today is because the PRC has a veto on their membership. The PRC refuses to have diplomatic or commercial ties with any nation that recognizes Taiwan as a sovereign nation, which includes the UN itself.
Trade with the PRC is very lucrative, and you don't have to follow the money very far to realize why Taiwan was expelled from the UN the same year, the same DAY that the PRC joined.
By the standards the UN used to declare Taiwan just a province rather than a sovereign nation, the USA itself cannot be a sovereign nation, it is the wholly-owned property of the United Kingdom.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Taiwan
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Taiwan and the UN
china troll
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Taiwan and the UN
Technically speaking Taiwan wasn't expelled. It is simply that countries changed which government they considered to be the legitimate government of China. The entity of "China" has had a continuous presence in the UN and was never expelled or added after it nitially joined. Who represented it in that body changed though.
Frankly, with China in full control of the mainland it was simply bending to reality to recognise it as the official government of China.
The lasting problem though is that you have some people, on both side of the straights, who hang on to the idea of "One China" (but of course with different visions of who is or should be in charge...). Of course, the most pressing part of the problem is China throwing its weight around making any international cooperation with Taiwan a nightmare.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Taiwan and the UN
"It's a province of China to which a civil war thug fled and where his thuggish descendants are still holed up. "
You know how we can tell you're with the Chinese ministry of propaganda, bro?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Taiwan and the UN
He doesn't need to be. That's the "correct" narrative for any proud Chinese.
People don't get paid to support the "Lost Cause" but you still see them all over the comment section of many articles...
It's funny seeing Godfree's comment in contrast to Bergman's right below it. One one side Taiwan as the last bastion of a legitimate Chinese government with the thugs across the water and vice versa.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Taiwan and the UN
Personally, I consider it all irrelevant to the state of each now. There isn’t one China, there are two.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Taiwan and the UN
yup
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Taiwan and the UN
"There isn’t one China, there are two."
Not really. There's one China. Then there's the republic of Taiwan which effectively seceded from China back in 1949.
That's the factual reality, no matter what either China or Taiwan think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Taiwan and the UN
"He doesn't need to be. That's the "correct" narrative for any proud Chinese."
Oh, i know. Taiwan should simply either admit that "China" is the PRC and they're a province thereof, and kiss their freedoms goodbye...
...or simply admit that Taiwan isn't China, the secession official, and stop trying to tapdance in circles around, as you say, the "lost cause". Of course, the second option may have the PRC putting their army on a wartime footing in minutes, so by now Taiwan may have little choice other than clinging to anything which won't indicate to the PRC that they've done exactly that which, through the last 2500 years has always had the emperor muster his armies.
There are a few other issues with "Godfree"'s comments. That he simply threw out a single one-liner may indicate that's his honest thought on that situation, as compared to his carefully phrased wordwalls around how the Uighur concentration camps are a myth and China a shining bastion of civil rights as compared to the US, for instance. With Mike identifying his posts as coming from an asian proxy we end up with "Godfree" either being a bona fide 50-cent army member or a troll really going the distance to sound like such a one.
"It's funny seeing Godfree's comment in contrast to Bergman's right below it."
With objectively, both views being dead wrong, you mean? Yes, that IS funny. In a very gallows humor sort of way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Taiwan is the pre-communist Chinese government-in-exile. The last remnant of the government the Chinese revolution overthrew.
That's why the People's Republic of China hates them so much - they're the last province of China that is still governed by the legitimate government.
It's the PRC's official policy that they will refuse to have commercial or diplomatic ties to any nation that officially recognizes these facts about Taiwan. The US used to recognize Taiwan, but dropped that recognition in order to get lucrative trade deals with mainland China.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
i don't think you know what you're talking about
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
people born from 1950-1962 in professional occupations in that general region
maybe jp nk de in cn
I would have some questions/other for them if I could ask them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That ship hs sailed...
In the same way that China has to let go that Taiwan is China so does Taiwan have to let go that it is China.
It is a hugely destructive co-dependent relationship where neither party can acknowledge that yes, it is over.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1) I guess Taiwan is more accustomed to dealing with crap coming from China than any other country in the world, so of course they did a better job reacting to COVID-19, too.
2) That should be "him" not "himself" (learn to use the objective case for objects, as is appropriate).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This entire thing is not a WHO specific issue
For all the baching of the WHO that's been going on this is not a WHO thing. All international bodies have to set up strange roundabout relationships to deal with Taiwan. This is awkward for the international bodies involved and for Taiwan.
One of the most visible examples of this is the various loopholes involved in getting Taiwanese to participate in the Olympics.
It is not up to the WHO and other international bodies to change that status quo. They dont have any major independent power being entriely reliant on the nation states that back them. And there we get to the major rub, only 15 countries recognise Taiwan; Belize, Guatemala, Haiti, Holy See, Honduras, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Nicaragua, Palau, Paraguay, St Lucia, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Swaziland and Tuvalu.
Note the total absence of any major western power. China has been successful in diplomatically isolating Taiwan and they are at the heart of the problem. But the fact that no-one is willing to back Taiwan against China is what puts these international bodies in such difficult positions and allow the status quo to remain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This entire thing is not a WHO specific issue
It worked out just fine for the WTO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This entire thing is not a WHO specific issue
One of the only exceptions.
The capitalistic global system can't abide strong barriers to business. Even China has, in fact, has got strong trade and business ties across the straight...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re; Kuomintang v ROC, North v South Sudan, Philistines v Zionist
"...to which a civil war thug fled"
true, so what? The real thug was Chiang Kai-shek's wife, ask WWII's Wild Bill Donovan. All lifetimes and Worlds past.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Because Taiwan is not a member of the UN (because China still insists it's a "rogue province" rather than an independent country) [...]"
They say that about Tibet as well. How long do you reckon it will be before India and Japan are 'rogue provinces' of China?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"They say that about Tibet as well. How long do you reckon it will be before India and Japan are 'rogue provinces' of China?"
Probably never. China is weird that way. The areas they traditionally held for 500 years or so in ancient times they hang on to or try to recover no matter what. That's why they'll never let go of Hong Kong, Xinjiang, or Tibet.
Taiwan's a bit more of a wildcard. not having been claimed by China until the 17th century.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]