If we want to discuss Taiwan's national status from the perspective of international law, we must first separate the issue of Taiwan's sovereignty from the legal status of the Republic of China (ROC).
The former is a matter of territorial disputes under international law, while the latter is a matter of state or government theory. The two issues involve completely different discussions.
From the perspective of international law, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 2758 in 1971 to officially resolve the problem of which government was the legitimate representative of China, the old ROC or the new People's Republic of China (PRC).
The decision that the PRC government is the only legal representative of China was tantamount to declaring that the PRC government represents China in the international community. The ROC government thus passed on to the PRC.
However, the fact that the ROC is not a legal entity under international law is a different issue from the issue of Taiwan's status. The countries of the world do not, however, have the right to recognize Taiwan as a part of China. Since its establishment in October 1949, the PRC has never for a day ruled the island. Only the Taiwanese living here in Taiwan have the right to decide Taiwan's sovereignty. Neither China nor any other foreign country has the right to make that decision.
After Taiwan's democratization and direct presidential elections the Taiwanese have the ability to freely express their opinion. They have already removed the obstacles to their right to exercise self-determination, and it is now becoming difficult to continue to claim that Taiwan's legal status remains inconclusive.
Moreover, the view that Taiwan's legal status remains inconclusive cannot ensure Taiwan's independence from China.
It merely passively points out that the island does not necessarily belong to China. Taiwan remains an object that still has to be disposed of by China and the international community, and in the end, China will most likely get its way.
On Oct. 25, 2004, former US secretary of state Colin Powell commented during a visit to China that Taiwan "does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation" and is not an independent state.
This year, British academic James Crawford discussed Taiwan's status at length in the new edition of his book The Creation of States in International Law.
He cites various official Taiwanese documents to prove that Taiwan is not a nation, and his reason for reaching this conclusion is that "Taiwan is not a state, because it does not claim to be."
Back in Taiwan, both the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party and their supporters have always claimed that the ROC is an independent, sovereign state and that they will safeguard the nation's sovereignty.
Meanwhile, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party and its supporters also claim that the ROC exists independently of any other state and that Taiwan absolutely is an independent state whose national title is the Republic of China. Even those striving for independence claim that Taiwan has been long independent, and that sovereignty belongs to the 23 million people of Taiwan.
These claims and this kind of understanding are obviously very different from the international community's perspective, and this is the real reason behind Taiwan's diplomatic predicament.
Li Ming-juinn lectures at the Research Center for Humanistic Education at Huafan University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his