Most people snigger at the idea of Taiwan supporting Japan becoming a permanent member in the UN Security Council.
This gesture of support by Taiwan, whose voice has been muffled by China to the point of near silence, is unfortunately pitifully amusing. After all, President Chen Shui-bian's (
What practical value does Taiwan's support have in this global organization, from which it is excluded for no reason other than pressure from a single authoritarian nation?
But the bizarreness doesn't stop there.
The permanent members of the council were the victorious nations of World War II. At the time, they represented the peacekeepers of the world. Half a century after formation though, the members of the Security Council have made a mockery of its authority by using its power for their own good: for example, the US' behavior in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq last year, despite the opposition by other UN members, and retaining the exclusive right to possess nuclear arms while formulating the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which forbids the rest of the world from doing so.
The "global watchdog" has only been looking out for its own good, so why do we still grant this relic of World War II a status it doesn't deserve, and why are we eager to play by rules we know to be unfair?
For Japan to become a permanent member of the Security Council, the past 10 years of talks about UN reform need to graduate from the "discussion" level. Changing the composition of the Security Council's permanent members -- for a better representation of today's world powers and fairly reflecting the interests of the developing world -- will require amendment of the UN Charter as well as approval by all five veto-wielding members of the council.
The paradox of this is obvious. Would any of the existing permanent members allow newcomers to dilute their power -- if, indeed, there is truly power attached to such status?
China has already jumped up in opposition to Japan's bid for a permanent membership. Understandably, why would China allow another Asian nation to gain the same status it has and counterbalance its military expansion in the Asia-Pacific region?
Japan has been struggling with the guilt and shame of its crimes in World War II. Its aspiration to become a permanent member of the Security Council stems from the growing awareness of the need for a strong democratic nation to balance the ambitious and expanding authoritarian China in the Asia-Pacific region.
The effort by Japan to move beyond the shadow of World War II is not purely academic. Japan's dispatch of Self Defense Forces to the Indian Ocean and to Iraq following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks were missions that ex-ceeded the limits of UN peacekeeping operations and gave the country confidence.
Just as Japan has realized the necessity of growing out of the boundaries the world has imposed on her, Taiwan, too, is merely trying to make the most of itself.
Taiwan's support for Japan is part of its humble wish that, by balancing the power structure in East Asia, peace can be kept in the region as well as across the Taiwan Strait.
It's time for the UN to stop belittling the nation.
Wen Wei-ni is a freelance writer based in Taipei.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath