Based on Akio Yaita’s essay, this article examines how the Chinese Communist Party influenced the WHO during the novel coronavirus crisis and attempted to exclude Taiwan from international infectious disease countermeasures. It questions the essence of Xi Jinping’s regime, which prioritizes national face and the “One China” principle over human life.

March 2, 2020
Chinese Diplomacy That Moves the WHO and Excludes Taiwan: Xi Jinping’s Regime Values National Face over Human Life
The following continues from the previous chapter.
National face over the people.
One reason China hurried to seal off Wuhan was its response to the World Health Organization, the WHO.
From January 22 to 23, the WHO held an emergency meeting in Geneva and placed the novel coronavirus on the agenda.
However, because China had sealed off Wuhan, the WHO concluded that the outbreak did not constitute a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, or PHEIC.
One of the reasons was that China was said to be taking sufficient measures.
Tedros, the Director-General of the WHO and a native of Ethiopia, had been close to China since his time as foreign minister and is known as an “old friend of the Chinese people.”
When he met President Xi Jinping in Beijing at the end of January, he praised China, saying that the Chinese people were fighting a difficult battle toward containment and that he believed they would surely win.
However, infection continued to spread.
Human-to-human transmission was confirmed in foreign countries as well.
Criticism of the WHO’s decision poured in from many countries.
One week later, on January 30, the WHO held another meeting and recognized the situation as an emergency.
But dissatisfaction and criticism have not subsided.
China’s forceful diplomatic method of trying to move international organizations through political power also drew the displeasure of the international community.
Infectious disease countermeasures cannot be fully effective if there are gaps or unevenness in regional responses.
Yet China values national face over human life and clings to the “One China” principle.
It is desperately trying to use disaster for political purposes and to exclude Taiwan from the international community.
Taiwan’s representative alone was not allowed to participate in the WHO emergency meeting mentioned earlier.
Improvements were made at later meetings, but it goes without saying that this was a serious blow to effective countermeasures.
About four hundred Taiwanese people were staying inside the closed city of Wuhan.
China allowed charter planes rescuing American and Japanese citizens to take off and land.
But it refused to respond to Taiwan’s request.
Only on February 4 was takeoff and landing finally permitted.
Even in a situation where disaster had occurred and immediate humanitarian action to protect human life was required, China devoted itself to bullying Taiwan.
What exactly had to be done at that moment?
In China’s case, its understanding of such matters differs completely from the sensibilities of other countries.
As a result, the necessary measures were not taken.
China’s intention is that, if Taiwan’s existence is erased from international society, the Taiwan issue will become China’s internal affair, and unification can be pursued without interference from foreign countries.
In fact, because of China’s bullying of Taiwan, when countries such as Italy and Vietnam suspended direct flights to China as part of infection prevention measures, they also ended up suspending flights to Taiwan.
On January 29, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated that Taiwan’s participation as an observer in WHO meetings would bring the greatest benefit to international public health.
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe also showed understanding of the need for Taiwan’s participation in the WHO at the House of Councillors Budget Committee on January 30, saying that if a region is excluded for political reasons, preventing infection becomes difficult.
Finally, let us consider what this response to the novel coronavirus will bring to the Xi Jinping regime.
In recent years, the Xi regime has faced troubles both at home and abroad, including the U.S.-China trade war, the prolonged Hong Kong protests, and the slowdown of the domestic economy.
The Communist Party regime has experienced major disasters before, including the SARS crisis of 2003 and the Sichuan earthquake of 2008.
However, in its response to the present novel coronavirus outbreak, all of China has fallen into great confusion.
A further decline in the centripetal force of the Xi regime is inevitable.
Voices are even emerging among reform-minded intellectuals saying that this is “the beginning of the end” of the Communist Party regime, which has continued to rule the country under an authoritarian leadership system since the founding of the state.
What Akio Yaita’s essay makes clear is extremely serious.
For the Chinese Communist Party, even infectious disease countermeasures do not put human life first.
National face comes first.
The convenience of the Party comes first.
Xi Jinping’s authority comes first.
That is why information is hidden.
That is why doctors are silenced.
That is why the citizens of Wuhan are abandoned.
That is why Taiwan is excluded.
That is why even the WHO is pulled along by China’s will.
Never before has the essence of the Chinese Communist Party’s one-party dictatorship been exposed so clearly.
The Japanese people must face this fact directly.
They must not be deceived by China’s words of “friendship” or “support.”
What they are truly trying to protect is neither the lives of the people nor the safety of the international community.
What they are trying to protect is the face of the Chinese Communist Party and the survival of the Xi Jinping regime.
To the international community that bows to such a country for money, the Asahi Shimbun must preach its favorite doctrine of “noble poverty.”
Without a moment’s delay, the Asahi Shimbun must preach the spirit of noble poverty to China and to the countries that follow it.
This essay will continue.