A few days after the presidential election, Nauru switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing. The “coincidence” fooled nobody. It was clearly a message to Taiwanese voters, punishing them for the audacity of electing President William Lai (賴清德) of the Democratic Progressive Party. What was surprising was the stated reason for Nauru’s decision, which referenced UN Resolution 2758, even though China’s economic clout was the more obvious impetus.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long tried to push the idea that the resolution bars Taiwan from participation in the UN and states that Taiwan is a territory of China. It does neither, which is clear to anyone who takes the time to read the text of the resolution. Taiwan is not even mentioned.
Even though pushing its Resolution 2758 narrative has long been a part of the CCP’s playbook for reinforcing its position on Taiwan’s sovereignty, it has ratcheted up the focus on the document after Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧) was made deputy head of the Central Leading Group for Taiwan Affairs in January last year. It is no stretch to imagine that Wang and the CCP were firmly behind Nauru’s citing of 2758, putting it front and center of the narrative on cross-strait issues, just as the CCP pushed other countries — namely Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan — to mention the “one China” principle in statements and link it to the resolution, to back up Beijing’s contention that the UN had “settled the status of Taiwan.”
There must, and has been, pushback against these misrepresentations. At a UN meeting on Sept. 20 last year, then-Marshallese president David Kabua called on the UN to rescind its interpretation of Resolution 2758. On May 16, US senators proposed a resolution to reject China’s mischaracterization of 2758. The resolution reaffirmed that Washington’s “one China” policy differs from Beijing’s “one China” principle, adding that the CCP was weaponizing 2758.
On April 30, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Mark Lambert spoke in Washington at the German Marshall Fund about the CCP’s “mischaracterization” of Resolution 2758. On Thursday last week, two US deputy assistant secretaries of state visited Taiwan and met with Taiwanese officials and representatives from Taiwan’s 12 allies, as well as those from Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, the EU, Finland, France, Japan, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Poland and the UK, to discuss 2758 and its implications for Taiwan’s participation in the UN, news reports said.
In all things, an action is met with a response. The more vehemently the CCP tries to peddle its mischaracterization of Resolution 2758, the more other nations not under its sway would feel the need to expose the falsehoods. Had China not ramped up its rhetoric, the lies would not have been so clearly exposed.
UN Resolution 2758 says nothing about Taiwan’s status, and it is not pertinent to Taiwan’s ability to join the UN. Article 1 of the UN Charter states that one of the global body’s purposes is to “develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples.” The majority of Taiwanese would tell you that they consider themselves to be a people in their own right. Nobody but Taiwanese have the right of the self-determination of the Taiwanese.
Taiwan fulfills the criteria laid out in Article 1 of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States for statehood, with the possible exception of international recognition, although it is still recognized by 12 countries. The obstacles to Taiwan’s participation in the UN are not legal, they are political, pushed by the CCP and based on Beijing’s lies.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS