Taiwan’s diplomatic predicament lies in the unclear definition of its sovereignty and the fact that China and other countries deny Taiwan’s sovereignty. Both the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) governments used diplomatic ties to show that Taiwan is a sovereign country, leading to the misplaced idea that the total number of allies is of extreme importance.
Taiwan’s diplomatic policy, however, has led to the following problems:
First is the uncertainty surrounding Taiwan’s status. From the perspective of international law, Taiwan does possess the main factors constituting a nation: a people, territory, a government and sovereignty.
Recognition by others is not a necessary condition for a country’s existence. Thus, it is unwise for the government to hinge Taiwan’s sovereignty on other countries’ recognition of its status through the establishment of diplomatic ties.
The second problem is the high cost of competing for sovereignty. Taiwan and China have always been competing for allies in a zero-sum game. Taiwan’s diplomatic policy has led to competition with China that has forced it to pay a considerable price.
If Taipei can view the number of allies objectively instead of looking at the establishment of ties as a means to affirm its sovereignty, the price of sovereignty will drop as the competition slows, thus lowering the cost for Taiwan’s diplomatic work.
The third problem is the unpredictability of secret diplomacy. Because of the diplomatic battle with Beijing, the government is forced to develop relations through nonofficial and secret methods.
Although such methods are concealed and can only with difficulty be prevented by Beijing, it creates a diplomatic mechanism without public monitoring. This causes problems such as the president’s so-called “state affairs funds.”
Then there are also the possible losses that may result from asymmetric information caused by the use of diplomatic brokers.
Moreover, the results that this policy have bought may disappear overnight if Beijing gives Taiwan’s allies a better offer or when one of the allies sees a change in government.
Not only does this mean that Taiwan’s sovereignty is connected to the number of diplomatic allies while ignoring the fact that it is an independent and sovereign state, but it also means that the establishment or severing of diplomatic ties can affect public morale.
The government should actively push for Taiwan’s participation in different international organizations, and it should also build reliable long-term cooperative relationships with the world’s leading non-governmental organizations. It should no longer pour all its diplomatic resources into the establishment of diplomatic ties, which not only wastes taxpayers’ money but also damages the nation’s dignity.
A thorough review of Taiwan’s foreign policy is badly needed.
Tim Hsu is an assistant professor in the School of Law at Chinese Cultural University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS