In recent months, high-level discussions in Taiwan have raised the prospect of the nation joining the International Criminal Court (ICC), one of the many institutional pillars of the international rules-based order that still excludes Taiwan.
Taiwan should swiftly move to join the court, as it would be an opportunity for the nation to send a clear signal to the world that it upholds the universal values of international law, justice and human rights.
Not being a member of the UN, Taiwan has faced difficulties in joining international institutions, but joining the ICC would be relatively straightforward: While most members have joined by depositing an instrument of accession to the Rome Statute with the UN, others have joined by unilaterally submitting to the court’s jurisdiction, which involves a simple declaration of accepting ICC jurisdiction over the territory it controls.
This method was used by Ukraine in 2013 and Palestine in 2015, and the court confirmed its jurisdiction over those areas in 2019 and 2020, including occupied and disputed territories.
The ICC has issued arrest warrants for war crimes in Ukraine, including for Russian President Vladimir Putin. ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan has also applied for arrest warrants for war crimes committed in Palestine and Israel (a non-member), including for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.
While the latter decisions have aroused considerable controversy in the US, this has not been true in much of the rest of the world, including close US allies. Taiwan can demonstrate its desire to be a normal member of the international community by joining the 124 other ICC members, including nearly every country in Latin America, and a majority of European and African states.
The move would strengthen Taiwan’s strong, values-based relationships with European allies, and make a clear first step toward mending Taiwan’s declining relations with Latin American and African states. It would signal to skeptical constituencies around the world that Taiwan is not a US puppet, but stands on its own two feet in international relations.
Some would argue that joining the ICC when the US is openly debating sanctioning the court risks alienating Taiwan’s most important ally. In reality, Taiwan would face no repercussions from the US. Hawks in Washington who are attacking the ICC are the same people who would never wish to appear weak on China by threatening Taiwan. Besides, this experiment has already run its course in Europe — the US has taken no actions against Western allies who have backed the court’s independence.
There is also the “deterrent factor.” Some have said ICC jurisdiction over Taiwan would be an effective deterrent against a Chinese invasion, even though an invasion of sovereign Taiwan would contravene international law, regardless of ICC jurisdiction.
Many security officials worry most about a blockade in which China cuts Taiwan off from the world. Some have estimated that in the event of a blockade, Taiwan would run critically low on food supplies within six months and would exhaust critical fuel stockpiles within weeks.
Taiwan’s supply of liquefied natural gas (LNG) is especially vulnerable, with reserves that might only last for up to 11 days, despite a plan for the grid to be 50 percent dependent on LNG by next year. Grid failures would inevitably lead to casualties as hospitals struggle to keep the lights on.
ICC jurisdiction might prove to have some deterrence against Chinese aggression in this case. In the Gaza war, the basis for arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant included “starvation of civilians as a method of warfare,” citing its restriction of food and medicine, as well as “cutting off and hindering electricity supplies” as specific acts constituting war crimes.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Chinese officials would similarly risk international arrest warrants for a blockade of Taiwan. Xi might be willing to risk a great deal to coerce Taiwan, but he is counting on the appearance of restraint to maintain China’s global standing.
Xi would become an international pariah at a time when China is attempting to assert global leadership.
Even Russia’s close BRICS ally South Africa was unwilling to host Putin for a BRICS event after the court issued a warrant for his arrest. Xi would likely receive the same treatment from non-aligned countries, which strongly rely on a rules-based order governed by international institutions that treat all nations, big and small, on equal footing.
Although the immediate impact of joining the ICC would be limited, it is a strategic and simple step the nation can take toward long-term deterrence and coalition building, sending a strong signal of Taiwanese values to the international community.
Sasha B. Chhabra is an analyst, commentator and media consultant on China’s foreign policy, Taiwanese politics and cross-strait affairs.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS