China says that it has official diplomatic relations with 181 countries on the basis of its “one China” principle, but a study published by a National University of Singapore (NUS) academic found that only 51 countries fully comply with Beijing’s definition of “one China.”
As China ups its intimidation of Taiwan, more countries are taking a clearer stance, defining Taiwan as an independent sovereign nation separate from the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
In the paper published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, NUS assistant professor Chong Ja Ian (莊嘉穎) says that many countries use different wording: Forty-one countries “recognize” the PRC as the sole legitimate government of China with no explicit mention of Taiwan’s sovereignty, 16 countries only “take note of” China’s claim, the US and nine other countries “acknowledge” the PRC’s claim, six countries “understand” or “respect” the claim and many others neither recognize the PRC as the sole legitimate government of China nor mention Taiwan’s sovereignty.
Countries use a broad range of official formulations beyond Beijing’s “one China” principle, thus they could have diplomatic relations with the PRC and robust unofficial ties with Taiwan.
However, as China pursues its claim over Taiwan, as well as the South China and East China seas, its expansionist plans and attempts to stand with Russia as an authoritarian partner have pushed democratic countries to clarify their stance on Taiwan, either opposing the “one China” principle or calling for the maintenance of the “status quo” within the geopolitical reality that Taiwan is already an independent, sovereign nation separate from the PRC. Many countries are also in support of Taiwan’s self-determination. US President Joe Biden has said that, although the US’ “one China” policy does not encourage Taiwanese independence, “Taiwan makes their own judgements about their independence... That’s their decision.”
Taipei has changed its position on the “one China” principle to deal with different realities. In the Martial Law era, the Republic of China (ROC) government under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime declared itself the legitimate government of China, including Taiwan. Today, the Democratic Progressive Party government objects to China’s claims over Taiwan, saying that Taiwan is already a sovereign state, so there is no need to declare independence.
However, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in his report at the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th National Congress last year insisted on a stricter “one China” principle and pushing for unification with Taiwan, irrespective of what Taiwanese want.
Chong’s study also says that Beijing pressured Taipei to adopt the so-called “1992 consensus,” but refuses any alternative to its “one China” principle, including the “different interpretations” the KMT has used as the basis for its talks with the PRC.
The KMT last week sent a delegation to meet China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Director Song Tao (宋濤). Song reiterated the importance of implementing Xi’s will and completing China’s strategy to resolve “the Taiwan question”, in line with a white paper released last year aiming for unification with Taiwan. The paper does not rule out the use of military force.
Former vice president Lien Chan (連戰), in his memoir published last month, called on Beijing to face up to the existence of the “ROC government,” and said that “only with such political mutual trust can cross-strait dialogue begin.” China criticized him, saying that his emphasis on the ROC was essentially a “two-state theory” implying independence. This should show the KMT that Beijing’s idea of “unification” would mean the end of the ROC.
The idea of “one China” has long been a major cause of antagonism across the Taiwan Strait and rigid diplomatic interactions. However, with more countries realizing Taiwan’s economic and political importance, China’s stranglehold on global diplomacy will hopefully weaken.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS