WikiLeaks’ release of confidential US diplomatic cables on Aug. 30 with references to Taiwan have sent the Taiwanese political world into a frenzy. One of the cables revealed that since September 2009, Taipei has been pushing for Taiwan to participate in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as an “emissions entity,” as opposed to a state. While this is the right tactic, it would be better if it were part of a cohesive overall strategy to dispel any concern that Taiwan risks losing its sovereignty or having its international space stunted. To accomplish this, Taiwan should look more to the WTO model, not that of the World Health Assembly (WHA) model.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) says that Taiwan and China have agreed to a “diplomatic truce,” but there is little evidence of Beijing observing any kind of truce from the way it continues to block Taipei’s participation in international organizations.
It is true that Taiwan has been able to attend WHA meetings as an “observer nation.” However, the government has given up applying for UN membership and it has made little headway in applying for participation in either the UN’s International Civil Aviation Organization or the UNFCCC, not to mention the World Bank or the IMF, with meetings coming up in the run-up to the presidential election.
The WHA model is not the way to go and the government should steer clear of it. Although Taiwan applied for WHA observer nation status as a health entity, this was only granted following negotiations with Beijing and China’s request to the WHO secretary-general, who then, without first securing a WHO resolution on the matter, invited Taiwan to attend. Every year Taiwan wants to attend the WHA meeting it has to go through this process again.
In other words, the model of Taiwan’s participation in the WHA suggests that it is a territory under the jurisdiction of China, not simply a “health entity.”
The WHA route raises concerns about loss of sovereignty; however this is not the case with the WTO model. In line with clause 33 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and Article 12 of the Agreement Establishing the WTO — both of which deal with the topic of accession — and having secured the approval of the Ministerial Conference, Taiwan was able to join the WTO as a separate customs territory. It enjoys full and independent status as a member nation, which in no ways restricts its space or places it under the jurisdiction of another country.
Given that major global powers are reluctant to accept Taiwan’s participation in international organizations as a sovereign nation, Taiwan should adopt the next-best choice — using the WTO model of seeking membership as an “entity” — be it a political, legal, economic, social, cultural, health or civil aviation entity.
For example, there is a general consensus that Taiwan should be part of the international fisheries management system.
Article 1, Clause 3 of the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement states that “[t]his Agreement applies mutatis mutandis [the necessary changes having been made] to other fishing entities whose vessels fish on the high seas.”
Since 1997, Taiwan has joined fishery organizations as a “fishing entity,” allowing it to sign agreements with many regional fishery management organizations. Indeed, Taipei has joined at least nine world fishery organizations, at least five of which were signed during former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) tenure.
Not all international organizations allow for membership as a separate customs territory. The government can take a two-step approach to this.
First, it should endeavor to apply for Taiwanese participation as an entity — the exact nature of which depends on the nature of the organizations. It is important that these organizations recognize Taiwan as a full and independent observer nation and in such a way that it in no way places any constraints on Taiwan’s rights nor places it under the control of China. This would need to be approved by the decisionmaking body of that organization.
The second step is for Taiwan to do all it can to get the relevant countries, including China, to amend the regulations of international organizations to allow Taiwan to become a full and independent member as an entity. This would resolve the issue of international participation, if only temporarily.
I hope that Beijing would explore this option and not reject it out of hand. The WTO model does not involve the issue of Taiwanese sovereignty and yet it allows Taiwan to participate internationally, which can only be good for all concerned.
It is a win-win situation. Beijing needs to realize that resolving Taiwan’s inability to participate internationally is essential to tackling the root causes of longstanding areas of contention in cross-strait matters and would be beneficial to long-term peace and prosperity in the two countries, as well as the region.
And, instead of simply stepping aside and desisting from placing obstacles in Taiwan’s way, Beijing should get involved, promoting amendments to these international bodies’ regulations to allow Taiwan to join based on the WTO model.
Tung Chen-yuan is a professor at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Development Studies.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS