With the 79th session of the UN General Assembly set to hold its General Debate from Tuesday next week, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that Taiwan this year would focus on challenging and refuting China’s misinterpretation and misuse of UN Resolution 2758, highlighting its fight against China’s hegemonic diplomacy and lawfare to exclude Taiwan from international society.
UN Resolution 2758 states that the General Assembly recognizes “that the representatives of the Government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) are the only lawful representatives of China to the UN” and “expel[s] forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the UN and all the organizations related to it.” The resolution does not mention Taiwan at all. Nevertheless, it has been misused by Beijing as a tool to push its “one China principle” and to block Taiwan’s international engagement.
Nauru’s decision in January to cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan on the grounds of UN Resolution 2758 and the “one China principle” demonstrated the risk that if the misunderstanding is not clarified soon, the cross-strait status quo that “neither Taiwan nor the PRC is subordinate to the other” would be subverted by China.
A growing number of democracies and like-minded states have begun questioning China’s false claims about Taiwan and UN Resolution 2758. Following the US House of Representatives’ passage of the Taiwan International Solidarity Act to counter China’s distortion of the resolution, US Deputy Assistant Secretary for China and Taiwan Mark Lambert in April openly expressed strong opposition to Beijing’s misrepresentation, and underlined that the resolution neither endorsed an international consensus on the “one China policy” nor “constitute a UN institutional position on the political status of Taiwan.” The German Marshall Foundation in Washington also released a research paper saying that China’s assertion that the resolution is the basis for its “one China principle” is a flawed legal assumption and argument.
The Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) during its annual summit in July passed a model resolution on 2758 saying that it does not endorse the “one China principle” and that the lack of representation for millions of Taiwanese in the UN should be remedied. IPAC delegates vowed to pass similar resolutions in their respective countries. The summit was attended by 49 members from 24 countries.
Meanwhile, Australia was the first country whose senate unanimously passed a motion regarding the misinterpretation of UN Resolution 2758. The Dutch House of Representatives also passed a motion rejecting Beijing’s distortion of the UN resolution and requested that the Dutch government seek support for this position within the EU.
Since this year’s UN General Assembly’s theme is “Leaving no one behind: acting together for the advancement of peace, sustainable development and human dignity,” the government and civil groups in Taiwan have pledged to increase efforts in appealing to the UN and the international community to stop China from misrepresenting the resolution, as the UN has ironically left behind Taiwan’s 23.5 million people.
Regretfully, when Democratic Progressive Party lawmakers on Wednesday proposed passing a motion clarifying Taiwan’s stance on UN Resolution 2758, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party demurred and walked out of the meeting. This move should be considered as an acquiescence to China’s bullying and distortion of Taiwan’s sovereignty and international representation.
Taiwanese authorities should work with like-minded partners to explicate how to correctly interpret UN Resolution 2758 to safeguard the nation’s sovereignty. The public should also beware of Chinese toadies who are hindering Taiwan’s solidarity and facilitating the authoritarian regime’s efforts to isolate Taiwan.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Keelung Mayor George Hsieh (謝國樑) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on Tuesday last week apologized over allegations that the former director of the city’s Civil Affairs Department had illegally accessed citizens’ data to assist the KMT in its campaign to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) councilors. Given the public discontent with opposition lawmakers’ disruptive behavior in the legislature, passage of unconstitutional legislation and slashing of the central government’s budget, civic groups have launched a massive campaign to recall KMT lawmakers. The KMT has tried to fight back by initiating campaigns to recall DPP lawmakers, but the petition documents they
RSS