Asia Report #57 | January 19, 2022
United Nations Resolution 2758 seating the People’s Republic of China (PRC) at the UN passed its 50th anniversary in 2021. Fifty years on, China continues its campaign to influence the diplomatic relations and international recognition of Taiwan. While the PRC’s UN seat is undisputed, the deleterious impact of Taiwan’s exclusion from multilateral organizations and constraints on its global engagement became more than evident in a pandemic hit world.
The Sigur Center for Asian Studies dedicated its final Roundtable of 2021 to unpack these concerns and discuss the implications. The discussants included keynote speaker, Liang-Yu Wang, Deputy Representative of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office-U.S., and panelists Pasha L. Hsieh, Associate Professor and Dean at Singapore Management University Yong Pung How School of Law, and Michael Mazza, Nonresident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, the Global Taiwan Institute, and the German Marshall Fund of the United States. The discussion was moderated by Deepa Ollapally, Associate Director of the Sigur Center.
Taiwan’s Pragmatic Approach and Resolution 2758
Deputy Representative Liang-Yu Wang framed her remarks highlighting the need to overcome Taiwan’s current limited international participation. She pointed out how the unprecedented global health crisis has eclipsed other concerns and triggered an even higher level of global connectivity. Indeed, Taiwan has proven its vital role in supporting other nations and successfully managing the virus itself. She noted that U.S. Secretary of State, Antony Blinken acknowledged Taiwan’s participation in COVID relief was pragmatic, not political and that the G7 foreign ministers support Taiwan’s presence in the World Health Organization (WHO) and World Health Assembly (WHA).
Despite its enviable example of public health management, Wang deplored Taiwan’s continued lack of meaningful participation in the UN and access to UN venues. She cited two methods that China uses to block Taiwan from entering international space. One, that China imposes political pressure on UN member states and other international organizations, and two, that China fabricates a legal basis of exclusion via intentionally misinterpreting Resolution 2758.
Wang concluded by emphasizing that like-minded nations who share values with Taiwan should work together to end Taiwan’s discrimination from the UN. She criticized China for being a gatekeeper and pointed to the secret Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 2005 between the UN and China which mandated that the PRC must approve of any Taiwanese participation in UN activities. Wang closed her remarks by reiterating that Taiwan has demonstrated responsibility and pragmaticism in their diplomatic relations. She complimented the success of the U.S.- launched Taiwan Global Cooperation and Training Framework (GCTF) Program, and development of GCTF 2022.
Recognition and Taiwan’s Participation in Economic Agreements
Pasha L. Hsieh opened his comments by making the distinction between the legal and political concepts of recognition. The variable criteria for recognition is its largest obstacle in joining economic agreements. In international law, Chinese representation is only existent through the PRC’s seat in the UN under Resolution 2758. Taiwan also faces a state recognition issue under the provisions of the 1933 Montevideo Convention. As of December 2021, 15 countries recognize Taiwan as a state. The political concept expands on recognition as a gradual process, and recognition can exist within spaces of non-recognition. This complicates the legal binary of total inclusion or exclusion.
Hsieh went on to detail Taiwan’s Free Trade Agreements (FTA), Bilateral investment agreements (BIA), and relations with the U.S. and European Union (EU). In general, Taiwan holds a sparse number of FTAs, and failed in closing an agreement with Mainland China. It enjoys a greater number of BIAs, especially in Asia and America. At present, Taiwan is blocked from the economically significant Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) since membership require unanimous votes, and the PRC holds membership. Both Taiwan and China have applied to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific (CPTPP).
Hsieh closed his presentation by pointing to a hopeful future for Taiwan’s bilateral relations with the EU and U.S. On the former, he noted the juxtaposition of the freeze on the EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI), and the EU’s prioritization of a potential BIA with Taiwan. On U.S.-Taiwan relations, he saw the possibility of some promising developments within a new Indo-Pacific Economic Framework in 2022.
Righting a Wrong: Taiwan, the United Nations, and United States Policy
Michael Mazza elaborated on Wang’s comments regarding China’s misinterpretation of Resolution 2758, and further argued for a recalibration in U.S. policy towards Taiwan’s engagement in the UN. He asserts that U.S. policy makers are not treating the promotion of Taiwan’s participation in the UN system as a negotiation with China as they should be doing.
To address the core of the issue—the legality of Resolution 2758 itself, Mazza showed that the initial expulsion of Chiang Kai-Shek’s representative was not sound, and the Republic of China (ROC) was not actually expelled when the PRC was seated. Rather, the resolution was made under the impression that China had simply changed its name, and that the PRC now represented total Chinese interest at the UN table. Indeed, according to Mazza China has created a false history of UN-backed Taiwan exclusion. It ignored the fact that the PRC and ROC have distinct international legal personalities. This has been exacerbated by statements from Ban Ki-Moon and Kofi Annan, who perpetuated the artificial narrative of prohibition.
In fact, there is no formal determination on the status of Taiwan. Mazza continues by designating three “baskets” of logic as to why Taiwan should be active in the UN. Firstly, he restated the importance of world connectivity, and commends Taiwan for demonstrating its importance in several sectors and contributions to the world economy. Thus, it would be more beneficial for organization such as the WHO to include Taiwan based on their organizational purpose. Second, he claimed that Taiwan’s participation is consistent with both the Taiwan Relations Act and the U.S.’ One China Policy. Thirdly, that international law should be clarified and upheld by rectifying the continued misinterpretation. Otherwise, there would be no validity to international legal foundations such as the Montevideo Convention.
Consequently, he stated that the U.S. needs a full-court press campaign for Taiwan’s full membership in the UN. He explained that the U.S. would need long term commitment to this policy decision, and that its overall goal should be destigmatizing Taiwan in the diplomatic space.
Prospects
Shedding Taiwan’s “invisibility” cloak would demand a collaborative and sustained effort. Wang called on middle-level officials in IOs to maintain a neutral stance and safeguard the pragmaticism of international affairs. She also places her faith in the continued support of other democratic nations. Mazza advocated for the U.S. to publicize the true legal ramifications of Resolution 2758 and negotiate with Beijing on legal grounds rather than on shakier political terms. Hsieh saw the China-Taiwan issue as a matter of representation, not division. The EU and U.S. should continue to develop closer diplomatic and economic relations to Taiwan through positive outcomes within new economic frameworks. Taiwan and China are distinct, and they both represent a portion of Chinese interest. This nuance should be reflected accordingly in the international space.
By Melynn Oliver, Project Assistant, Taiwan Studies Initiative, Sigur Center for Asian Studies.
