Instead of bidding for UN membership this year, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government said it would work to seek “meaningful participation” in the UN’s affiliated agencies.
Doing away with the policies of entering the UN under the name “Taiwan” or returning under the name “Republic of China” (ROC), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the new approach was based on the principles of pragmatism and flexibility.
While the ministry’s reasoning might sound levelheaded and practical, a closer look leads one to wonder whether the latest change of strategy is yet another attempt by the KMT government to play word games to avoid ruffling China’s feathers.
The UN’s auxiliary agencies include the Universal Postal Union (UPN) and the WHO. The ROC had been a member of the UPN since 1914 when Taiwan’s seat was taken over by the People’s Republic of China in 1972 after the UPN chose to shift recognition to Beijing. However, the change did not affect the ability of Taiwan’s Chunghwa Post to maintain international postal deliveries.
In other words — using the vocabulary of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration — Taiwan has been able to engage in “meaningful participation” in the UPN for years despite not being an official member. So why bother?
Taking the WHO as another example, China’s obstruction has for years prevented Taiwan from gaining membership in the world health body. In June this year, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Chairman Wang Yi (王毅) said that China would never accept Taiwan becoming a member of the WHO, but would look into setting up an international network that could be a “new framework” independent of the WHO to include Taiwan on information-sharing in case of disease outbreaks.
So how would the Ma administration be able to determine whether it achieved success in realizing Taiwan’s “meaningful participation” in the UN’s affiliated agencies?
If Taiwan’s so-called “meaningful participation” in UN agencies means doing what China tells it to do, then the KMT government might as well announce that Taiwan is part of China, which would guarantee Taiwan’s participation in the UN and its agencies.
Speaking to reporters about the country’s latest UN strategy, Ma said that no matter what the details of the UN bid might be, it should be achievable and uphold Taiwan’s dignity.
“We will take this into consideration and then make a proposal that will not only achieve our goals, but will also not affect other diplomatic interests or the interests of cross-strait relations,” he said.
While some may consider Ma’s remarks a reflection of his desire not to harm cross-strait relations, what they boil down to — much to China’s delight — is Ma tying Taiwan up in ribbons and handing it over to China to make the call.
All in all, the latest UN approach misses the key point, which is working to have the people of Taiwan treated with respect and having their voice represented at the UN.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
To recalibrate its Cold War alliances, the US adopted its “one China policy,” a diplomatic compromise meant to engage with China and end the Vietnam War, but which left Taiwan in a state of permanent limbo. Half a century later, the costs of that policy are mounting. Taiwan remains a democratic, technologically advanced nation of 23 million people, yet it is denied membership in international organizations and stripped of diplomatic recognition. Meanwhile, the PRC has weaponized the “one China” narrative to claim sovereignty over Taiwan, label the Taiwan Strait as its “internal waters” and threaten international shipping routes that carry more
RSS