The rejection of National Chung Cheng University students and their professor from a UN Human Rights Commission International Labor Conference earlier this month because they presented their passports should not surprise anyone who follows the news of petitions by groups and political parties to have Taiwan accepted into the UN, or Taiwan’s participation rejection, even as an informal member or observer, from almost any other inter-governmental institution since President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) assumed office last year.
However, that does not make the event any less shameful.
The UN policy to reject Republic of China (ROC) passport holders is not new; several Taiwanese visitors to the UN’s headquarters in New York City and the UN office in Geneva have been denied entry on presentation of their ROC passport to security over the years, with a number of high-profile cases gaining significant media attention in Taiwan.
UN representatives have said that its offices only accept travel documentation from territories it recognizes as countries.
Other forms of ID, such as a driver’s license or social security card, are acceptable for entry.
However, the academic delegation from National Chung Cheng University were not told that in this most recent affront to Taiwan’s dignity.
Professor Liu Huang Li-chuan (劉黃麗娟) and her labor relations students were barred from attending the conference because, they were told, Taiwan is not a country and does not adhere to the “one China” principle.
Never mind that the passports were issued by the ROC government, considering that just over one year ago, when former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was in office, acknowledging the ROC for all intents and purposes meant acknowledging “one China.” This justification is laughable at best and dangerous at worst.
To make matters worse, the delegation was told that to be admitted, they must present their Taiwan Compatriot Travel Documents, the ID card issued by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that permits Taiwanese to travel in China. This makes even less sense than the UN’s reasoning for refusing admission to the group from Taiwan.
The Taiwan Compatriot card is not recognized anywhere else in the world besides China; not even the countries most dedicated to upholding the “one China” principle ask Taiwanese to present this document.
Besides the few countries that do not accept the ROC passport and require an application for an entry permit or travel visa, the Taiwanese passport is one of the most widely accepted in the world, with 137 countries offering Taiwanese visa-exempt travel for a designated time.
Since Taiwan now has only 20 diplomatic allies, that means that the vast majority of those 137 countries are ones that adhere to a “one China” policy that the PRC finds acceptable.
The UN would do well to understand that refusing the participation of Taiwanese academics based on their travel documentation has nothing to do with a consistent policy of recognizing the “one China” principle.
Instead, it is a petty act of fealty to a government so insecure about what it considers its historical territory that it treats even the slightest or smallest courtesy to Taiwan as an existential threat.
Furthermore, this kind of behavior betrays the UN’s status as the highest representative body of the community of nations.
Taiwan might not be a universally recognized nation-state, but no one familiar with Taiwan could deny its distinct national identity. It is a vibrant and healthy democracy and its government, since democratization, has made significant progress in its respect for human rights, including the informal adoption of multiple UN accords.
This incident was not the result of an attempt by government officials to push for a change of guidelines or UN recognition; it was a group of well-intentioned students eager to participate in and learn from an international meeting of labor experts, workers and employers.
The UN commission dedicated to the advancement of the rights of all human beings, regardless of political identity, should reflect on the irony of its actions. It only does itself a disservice by shutting the door on Taiwanese participation in its conferences and events.
Jeremy Olivier is a graduate student in the international master’s program of Asia-Pacific Studies at National Cheng Chi University.
US President Donald Trump last week told reporters that he had signed about 12 letters to US trading partners, which were set to be sent out yesterday, levying unilateral tariff rates of up to 70 percent from Aug. 1. However, Trump did not say which countries the letters would be sent to, nor did he discuss the specific tariff rates, reports said. The news of the tariff letters came as Washington and Hanoi reached a trade deal earlier last week to cut tariffs on Vietnamese exports to the US to 20 percent from 46 percent, making it the first Asian country
Life as we know it will probably not come to an end in Japan this weekend, but what if it does? That is the question consuming a disaster-prone country ahead of a widely spread prediction of disaster that one comic book suggests would occur tomorrow. The Future I Saw, a manga by Ryo Tatsuki about her purported ability to see the future in dreams, was first published in 1999. It would have faded into obscurity, but for the mention of a tsunami and the cover that read “Major disaster in March 2011.” Years later, when the most powerful earthquake ever
Chinese intimidation of Taiwan has entered a chilling new phase: bolder, more multifaceted and unconstrained by diplomatic norms. For years, Taiwan has weathered economic coercion, military threats, diplomatic isolation, political interference, espionage and disinformation, but the direct targeting of elected leaders abroad signals an alarming escalation in Beijing’s campaign of hostility. Czech military intelligence recently uncovered a plot that reads like fiction, but is all too real. Chinese diplomats and civil secret service in Prague had planned to ram the motorcade of then-vice president-elect Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) and physically assault her during her visit to the Czech Republic in March last
As things heated up in the Middle East in early June, some in the Pentagon resisted American involvement in the Israel-Iran war because it would divert American attention and resources from the real challenge: China. This was exactly wrong. Rather, bombing Iran was the best thing that could have happened for America’s Asia policy. When it came to dealing with the Iranian nuclear program, “all options are on the table” had become an American mantra over the past two decades. But the more often US administration officials insisted that military force was in the cards, the less anyone believed it. After
RSS