The UN General Assembly met on Tuesday to review Taiwan’s application for “meaningful participation” in the UN agencies. This was the 15th consecutive year that Taiwan tried to gain some form of representation in the 192 member world body.
Last year, at the 62nd session of the UN General Assembly, the world body decided not to include the issue of Taiwan’s participation in the UN on its agenda. That decision was made because of enormous pressure from the Chinese delegation at the UN, especially on the African delegations. When Taiwan tried to gain membership in the WHO in May this year, its attempt was again stymied by China.
In the first instance, China’s Ambassador to the UN Wang Guangya (王光亞) told reporters then that the representatives of more than 120 UN member-states had clearly indicated at the plenary meeting of the Assembly that they were “opposed to the inclusion of the so-called Taiwan-related proposal into the agenda.”
Wang made the dubious claim that “both the mainland and Taiwan belong to one and the same China” and that this “has never been changed.” He also said: “There is only one China in the world and Taiwan is a part of China’s territory. This is the common position of the United Nations and the overwhelming majority of its member states.”
What Wang did not mention was the fact that, from 1945 to 1971, Taiwan represented the whole of China within the UN system and held a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. This was because the US and other victors in World War II simply chose to recognize the non-Communist entity (the Republic of China) over the Communist-controlled mainland China (the People’s Republic of China). This Cold War anomaly was corrected in 1971, when mainland China took Taiwan’s place on the Security Council and in the rest of the UN system.
This move made sense from the point of view that one cannot justify a situation in which a population of 1.3 billion people — mainland China — are represented by an island with only 23 million people — Taiwan.
But the UN made an egregious mistake in 1971. Taiwan at the time exhibited the main criteria for a sovereign state — control over a delimited territory, people, resources and an effective government. Yet, it disappeared from the UN system altogether.
As the world’s governing body, the UN operates on the principle of universality. This means that if a state meets the criteria for membership within this august body, then the organization should accept that state into the family of nations. The main criterion for UN membership is clear and can be found in Article 4(2) of its Charter. That article states that to be a member of the organization the applicant must be a “peace-loving” state willing and able to carry out the Charter’s obligations.
There is no doubt that Taiwan is a peace-loving state. Despite not being a member of the UN, it carries out the obligations of the UN Charter. In my visit to Taiwan earlier this year to observe the well-run presidential election, I came away with the impression that Taiwan is truly a de jure sovereign entity. In fact, it is more “sovereign” than many African countries whose economies are in tatters and whose governments are on the brink of inefficiency and outright failure. Yet, many states that are less able to control their populations, territory and resources are members of the UN — because of the universality principle.
Taiwan is a self-governing, autonomous, and prosperous entity with 35,980km² of territory that includes the Pescadores, Matsu, and Kinmen islands. It possesses ample natural resources (including coal, natural gas, limestone, marble and asbestos) and is able to meet the needs of its 23 million people. Its GNP of US$17,252 makes it the 18th largest economy in the world. It is a country with the fourth largest foreign exchange reserves globally, with a thriving IT sector and a record of humanitarian assistance to countries in need.
It is time for the UN representatives to stop giving in to pressure from China and do what is not only sensible but right in granting Taiwan a seat at the table, at least in some UN agencies. Taiwan can do much good in the areas of economic development, technical assistance, health, agriculture, the environment, the protection of endangered species and regional and global security. Why should China be allowed to object to Taiwan’s bid to make a positive contribution to the global agenda? What does China have to fear?
China is clearly emerging as a major global power. Its trade with African countries has quadrupled since the beginning of this decade. China is now Africa’s third-largest commercial partner after the US and France, and it is the second largest exporter to Africa after France.
We all know the primary reason why China needs Africa: natural resources. China needs oil in abundance and wants, like the US, to diversify its supply away from the troublesome area of the Middle East. But there is another reason.
In providing trade, aid, loans, debt relief, scholarships, arms and investments to African countries, China ensures that these countries are indebted to it. African states, through sheer numbers, dominate the UN General Assembly. Therefore, if China wants to deny Taiwan a place within the world body, all it has to do is put pressure on African delegations and remind them how good the Chinese government has been to them.
At the same time, the US has lost much of its clout in Africa. Even if it wanted to support Taiwan’s bid for membership in UN agencies, it can no longer muster enough support from countries in Africa to make this bid a reality.
So, for Taiwan’s application to be successful, it will have to hope that China feels secure enough to desist from placing obstacles in Taiwan’s path.
W. Andy Knight is professor of international relations at the University of Alberta and director of the Peace and Post Conflict Studies program and a governor of the Canadian International Development Research Centre.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS