A US State Department spokesperson at a routine press conference on June 19 expressed the US' opposition to Taiwan's plan to hold a referendum to determine whether the country should apply for UN membership under the name "Taiwan."
Several reasons were given for the opposition, including that the referendum appears designed to unilaterally change Taiwan's status, based on the US' "one China" policy. Also, the US does not support Taiwan's joining international organizations requiring statehood, so the referendum will not do anything to help Taiwan's UN bid while having an impact on peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
First, does joining the UN under the name "Taiwan" constitute a unilateral change to Taiwan's legal status? Such a question involves the interpretation of Taiwan's legal status. Applying for UN membership under the name of "Taiwan" is only a way to highlight that most Taiwanese feel that Taiwan is a sovereign state.
What is merely the Taiwanese people's interpretation of the nation's legal status will not necessarily amount to a binding and unilateral change to Taiwan's status. China will not recognize Taiwan as independent because of such a referendum. In the same way, the US will maintain its interpretation of Taiwan's status.
Second, I want to ask whether the referendum will be of any substantive help to Taiwan's UN bid. That should be decided by the Taiwanese themselves. I agree that it is delusional to think that the referendum in itself will suffice to grant Taiwan UN membership. If, however, the referendum is held, it will at the very least serve to determine Taiwan's future direction.
Third, cross-strait tensions are beyond the control of Taiwan itself. Whenever Taiwan takes democratic measures to show that it has sovereignty and thus is democratically legitimate in the eyes of the international community, China expresses its opposition. For example, in the run-up to Taiwan's first direct presidential election in 1996, China not only expresses opposition, but even threatened Taiwan.
If the US opposes Taiwan's actions simply because Chinese opposition leads to cross-strait tension, then the US is placing restrictions on good actions while promoting malicious behavior.
Finally, because the US is concerned with safeguarding its own interests, it is unwilling to support Taiwan's membership in international organizations that require statehood, which leaves other nations without ways to help.
Deeper reflection shows that holding a referendum will help the US control the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. If a majority of Taiwan's voters say that Taiwan should join the UN under the name of "Taiwan," they are saying that they do not think Taiwan is a part of China. This would give more international legitimacy to US arms sales to Taiwan and intervention in the cross-strait situation to maintain peace and security in the Taiwan Strait.
Without US support, it is very unlikely that Taiwan will be able to participate in any international organizations, particularly the UN. But if most Taiwanese freely and democratically express their wish for UN membership, there is no need for the US to manifest its opposition in terms that more or less amount to intervention in Taiwan's domestic affairs.
Regardless of what the US' stance may be, it could at least remain silent. That would give it more flexibility in negotiating with China and more options when dealing with other countries. On the name issue of Taiwan's UN bid, the US has plenty of room to maneuver and there is no need to overreact and even less need to be in such a hurry to show its stance.
Chiang Huang-chih is an associate professor at National Taiwan University's College of Law.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS