Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has recently been tampering with the invitations for this year’s World Health Assembly (WHA). Taiwan’s letter of invitation from the WHA made reference to UN Resolution 2758 — which, passed in 1971, recognized the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as “the only legitimate representative of China to the United Nations.” The letter also deliberately misrepresents the “one China” principle. Xi is using the WHA to try to place Taiwan in a strait-jacket. If former Chinese prime minister Zhou Enlai (周恩來) were still alive, he would certainly castigate Xi and his fellow “princeling” hangers-on for their unforgivable ignorance.
At the time, Zhou opposed — but was not overly worried about — the UN’s offer of dual representation for the Republic of China (ROC) and the PRC at the UN. This is because China would only need to refuse to attend, and, after a period of two years, Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) representatives to the UN would be ejected. Zhou was more concerned that Resolution 2758 would afford Taiwan the means to exist independently of China.
Zhou believed that the wording of Resolution 2758 was insufficient, since it only sought to clarify the legitimate representative authority of China. Zhou believed the resolution should go further than this and expel Chiang’s representatives from the UN, thereby restoring the PRC as the legal representative of China. Furthermore, Zhou felt that the resolution did not resolve the issue of the return of the “sovereign territory” of Taiwan to China, or of Taiwan’s future.
Therefore, should Taiwan apply to become a member of the UN, there would be no problem over membership since there would no longer be an issue over which governing authority represents China. Zhou was a far more shrewd and ruthless political operator than Xi and his contemporaries. Zhou understood that the question of the legal status of Taiwan was far from settled. He also knew that Resolution 2758 simply confirmed which governing body represented China, and that it contained a gaping hole which would prevent China from tying down Taiwan.
Zhou’s heartfelt confession to then US national security adviser Henry Kissinger is well documented. Then-Saudi Arabian ambassador to the UN Jamil Baroody proposed resolution L-638, which advocates “one China, one Taiwan” and that Taiwan’s membership in the UN should be decided later through a referendum in Taiwan. The proposed resolution cites Resolution 2758 as proof that the UN never settled the matter of which country Taiwan belongs to, nor Taiwan’s future membership status.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon thought himself rather clever when in July 2007 he rejected Taiwan’s UN membership application by linking Resolution 2758 to the “one China” principle. At the time, the US and Taiwan’s other allies separately expressed their objections to Ban’s interpretation of the resolution. The WHA invitation is simply the latest example of an international body conflating Resolution 2758 with the “one China” principle.
If, when Resolution 2758 was passed, it really had defined Taiwan as belonging to “one China,” then Xi and his lackeys at the UN would not need to waste so much time and energy cooking-up the so-called “1992 consensus” and then bullying Taiwan to accept it.
Forty-five years have passed since Chiang’s representatives to the UN disappeared in a puff of smoke. Taiwan has just independently chosen its new government, and the public has voted for a democratic country that has nothing whatsoever to do with China.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Edward Jones
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
Much has been said about the significance of the recall vote, but here is what must be said clearly and without euphemism: This vote is not just about legislative misconduct. It is about defending Taiwan’s sovereignty against a “united front” campaign that has crept into the heart of our legislature. Taiwanese voters on Jan. 13 last year made a complex decision. Many supported William Lai (賴清德) for president to keep Taiwan strong on the world stage. At the same time, some hoped that giving the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) a legislative majority would offer a
Owing to the combined majority of the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), the legislature last week voted to further extend the current session to the end of next month, prolonging the session twice for a total of 211 days, the longest in Taiwan’s democratic history. Legally, the legislature holds two regular sessions annually: from February to May, and from September to December. The extensions pushed by the opposition in May and last week mean there would be no break between the first and second sessions this year. While the opposition parties said the extensions were needed to
RSS