Pope John Paul II recently urged Beijing to "normalize relations" between China and the Vatican. Meanwhile, former Italian prime minister, Giulio Andreotti, who is in charge of diplomatic policy for the Holy See, stated that the Vatican could follow the "Wash-ington model" of establishing full diplomatic relations with Beijing, but at the same time maintaining "certain relations" with Taiwan.
These words aroused fears in Taiwan that relations with the Vatican could be severed.
For many years, I have studied the foreign relations and legal system of the Holy See, and I present the following observations for reference.
First, since the Holy See signed the Lateran treaty with Italy in 1929, it has been recognized around the world as a sovereign country -- the Vatican City State. In 1961, the Vienna Diplomatic Convention also recognized that the Holy See, like other sovereign countries, had the authority to post and receive diplomatic envoys. At present, the Holy See has envoys in 172 countries.
What is particularly worthy of attention in Taiwan, however, is that in the Holy See's view, the envoys it has sent to each country represent not only the recognition of diplomatic relations, but also the tie of ecclesiastical relations between the Catholic Church and that country.
The primary reason for this is that the Holy See is not just a sovereign country in the secular sense. It is also a nation to which 700 million Catholics around the world belong to in spirit.
Looking carefully at the content of the Pope's recent statements about China, we see that he only said the Vatican hopes it can reestablish channels for dialogue with Beijing and by this means build a relationship of understanding and mutual respect. From this we can see that the relationship the Pope wants to establish with Beijing is one primarily based on religious considerations. The Vatican hopes that Beijing can recognize the legal existence of Catholicism in China and that Catholics can spread the Gospel without being persecuted.
Regrettably, the Beijing authorities were unwilling to accept the Vatican's goodwill. They demanded as a front that the Holy See first break off diplomatic relations with Taiwan, but actually they were unwilling to see their "Catholic Patriotic Church," which they prop up, constrained by the Holy See.
Thus, even if the Vatican intends to establish formal diplomatic relations and religious ties with Beijing, the two sides are still in disagreement over the "Patriotic Church" and no solution to the impasse is likely to be found in the near future.
In the long term, if the differences between the Holy See and Beijing are resolved, the two sides could possibly establish formal relations.
The Holy See's envoys don't have the usual titles of ambassador, minister and so on. They have their own unique diplomatic titles. The title "Apostolic Nuncio" is used for ambassadors with the status of archbishop and "Apostolic Pro-Nuncio" is used for ambassadors without the status of archbishop.
Especially worthy of notice is the third rank of the Holy See's ambassadors, the "Apostolic Delegates." This title is given to those envoys stationed in countries that do not have formal diplomatic relations with the Holy See. Delegates represent only the religious relations between the Vatican and the Catholic Church in the country where they are stationed. How-ever, according to the stipulations of the Vienna Diplomatic Convention, they still have the status of diplomatic personnel.
What Andreotti called the "Washington model" of maintaining "certain relations" with Taipei would amount to posting an Apostolic Delegate with diplomatic status to Taiwan. Although this arrangement certainly isn't something we would wish for, the envoy currently posted to Taiwan to represent diplomatic relations with the Holy See has the status of "charge d'affaires," a rank even lower than an Apostolic Delegate.
At this moment, as the red light of diplomatic ties between China and the Vatican flashes, I hope our diplomatic authorities can grasp the above information and maintain flexibility in order to preserve diplomatic ties with the Holy See and preserve the dignity of the nation.
Paul Liu is a licensed California attorney and an assistant professor in the department of finance at Lunghwa University of Science and Technology.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS