An issue that seems to trip up many a statesman and civil servant around the world is whether Taiwan is a nation-state.
One often hears the misconception that Taiwan is not a state "because it is not recognized as such by the international community."
This is hogwash. From 1949 until 1979, the US did not recognize the People's Republic of China (PRC). Was China therefore not a state during that period? At present, the US doesn't recognize the Cuban government; is Cuba therefore not a nation-state?
The history of the US itself is a prime example of how fuzzy the issue can be.
Asked whether the US is a nation-state, most people would answer in the affirmative. However, when people are asked when the US became a nation state, most would emphatically answer 1776, when the Founding Fathers unveiled the Declaration of Independence.
Still, during the two years after the Declaration of Independence was signed, not a single country recognized the young republic. The first country to recognize the US -- France -- didn't do so until September 1778.
The second country -- Spain -- waited until a year later, and during its first 42 years of existence the US was recognized by only seven countries.
In the 1820s, a number of Latin American countries followed suit and in the 1830s European countries such as Belgium, Sardinia and the Two Sicilies also recognized the US.
Interestingly, the US did not attain 24 diplomatic recognitions -- Taiwan's present number -- until 1848, some 72 years after the Declaration of Independence.
Was the US therefore not a nation-state during that time? From this we might conclude that diplomatic recognition by itself doesn't determine whether a country is a nation-state or not. As has been pointed out by eminent academics such as Chen Lung-chu (陳隆志), the definition of a nation-state is provided in the 1933 Montevideo Convention, to which the US and Western European governments are signatories.
The convention defines nation-states as having a defined territory, a permanent population, a functioning government and the capability to enter into international agreements.
Taiwan possesses all these attributes -- indeed, it has diplomatic ties with 24 other states.
The question is thus not whether Taiwan is a nation-state -- it is. Rather, the question is how the nation is recognized internationally.
The government in Taipei now only claims to represent Taiwan and surrounding islands -- a major difference from 35 years ago, when the now outdated "one China" policy was established.
The US and most Western countries do not have diplomatic relations with the government in Taipei, but this stems from the fact that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration maintained until 1991 that it was the government of all of China.
That claim, which was recognized by the US until 1979, fell by the wayside after the PRC's entry in the UN in 1971.
However, the US switch in 1979 did not change Taiwan's status in any way -- it only changed which government was recognized by the US as the government of China. The change did not mean that Taiwan had suddenly become a non-country.
In view of the fact that during the past two decades Taiwan has transformed itself into a democracy and now wants to be a full and equal member in the international community, it is high time for the US, Western European countries and China -- to reassess their policy of politically isolating Taiwan and move toward normalization of relations with one of Asia's most vibrant democracies.
That is the only option that will bring peace and stability to the Taiwan Strait.
Gerrit van der Wees is editor of Taiwan Communique, a publication based in Washington.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
RSS