A crucial element in cross-strait tensions at the moment is the question of Taiwan’s participation in the international community. As China insists on the “one China” principle, it is very difficult for Taiwan to take part in international organizations.
Since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has been in office for six years, the nation has yet to break free of this insistence and can only engage with these organizations through special invitation, and only with China’s agreement, as it has done with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the World Health Assembly (WHA). The chances of formal membership in one of these international organizations remain remote.
Taiwan was invited to participate in a WHA meeting for the first time in 2009, in the capacity of observer nation. However, this observer nation status needed Beijing’s permission and was made possible by China’s recommendation, and Taiwan needed to be officially invited by the WHA. It can only participate in future WHA events if China continues to give its permission. The participation has been largely nominal and produced little actual benefit, and neither are there any guarantees that the experience will be repeated in the future. Taiwan certainly will not be there with full membership status or rights.
Last year, the head of the Civil Aeronautics Administration was invited to take part in an ICAO conference as a “guest,” akin to the nation’s participation in the WHA. However, as ICAO guidelines contain no provisions for observer nation status, participation as a guest did not give Taiwan any actual rights to speak of and, again, there are no guarantees that it will be able to continue attending as a guest in the future.
The nation’s participation in WHA and ICAO meetings has been purely nominal, and does not ensure a heightened national profile or guarantee its national interests.
Taiwan should participate in other international organizations in the same way in which it participates in the WTO.
Article 12 of the WTO Protocol of Accession for Chinese Taipei says that Taiwan accedes the WTO as a separate customs territory, and enjoys complete and independent membership status. It does not mention anything about being subjugated by, or placed in the jurisdiction of, any third country.
Given that world powers — including China — do not accept Taiwan’s participation in international organizations in the capacity of an independent country, Taiwan should adopt the second-best alternative of proceeding in line with the WTO model, seeking to achieve membership status in international organizations as a political, legal, economic, social, cultural, health or civil aeronautical entity.
For example, through the UN Fish Stocks Agreement, Taiwan has participated, since 1997, in at least nine international fisheries organizations in the capacity of a fishing entity, five of which were joined when former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was in office. In addition, during Chen’s tenure, Taiwan requested to take part in the WHA as a health entity.
Since the stipulations of internal organizations do not have provisions for status as a separate customs territory, as in the WTO documentation, in the initial stage Taiwan should try to get observer status within international organizations as different entities, but not allow itself to be pushed around or subjugated in any way by China.
This would require the permission of international organizations, and allow Taiwan to enjoy the rights of a full and independent observer nation.
In the second stage, Taiwan should lobby all countries — including China — to have amendments made to the regulations of international organizations to allow Taiwan to become a full and independent member of these organizations in the capacity of a relevant entity.
To reduce the obstacles China uses to prevent Taiwan’s participation in the international community, Taiwan should set up cross-strait cooperation commissions within the international organizations it wishes to join, to promote cooperation between the two countries on this matter. Beijing and Taipei can then do trial runs of this cooperation in APEC, the Asian Development Bank and the WTO, and gradually extend it to other international organizations, including those that Taiwan wishes to join in the future.
If Taiwan wants to protect its national interests and maintain stable cross-strait development, it needs to find a viable model for it to effectively participate in international organizations. Of course, many would like to see Taiwan do this in the capacity of a nation in its own right, but the international reality is unfavorable, so it is necessary to find a second-best option.
Only when the nation can find a solution to this situation can it address the roots of long-term cross-strait tensions, and this will benefit long-term cross-strait and regional stability and development.
Tung Chen-yuan is a professor at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Development Studies.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past