cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/3201775
It is long past time for Taiwan again to be included in the United Nations. Reasons include the need to address growing military tensions in the Taiwan Strait and to acknowledge Taiwan’s thriving democracy and economic importance.
That economic importance includes Taiwan’s enormous role in global supply chains. It produces more than 90 percent of the world’s high-end semiconductors and a significant portion of the advanced chips that drive the artificial intelligence revolution. Moreover, half of the world’s seaborne trade passes through the Taiwan Strait. Peace and stability around Taiwan has promoted global prosperity.
Meanwhile, China continues to intensify its aggression against Taiwan. Its attempts to change the status quo across the Taiwan Strait and expand its authoritarian ideology throughout the Indo-Pacific region are a profound threat to peace and security all around the world.
It has a larger economy and military than most other member countries, and its population is on par with most.
It was only removed to kiss China’s ass, that was a mistake.
You are greatly overestimating how much influence mainland China had in 1971.
Yeah, before 1971 they weren’t even in the UN. And, even after this happened, the US wouldn’t recognize the PRC for another 7 years, until 1978!
How much did it have, then? 8? 14?
Think you’re underestimating how weak the US looked in the aftermath of Vietnam.
The 70s were considered a low-point for a reason, and while I disagree with the opinion it’s also why Reagan is seen as a revival of American power.
Something similar happened in 2021, after the withdrawal from Afghanistan, which encouraged Putin in his invasion of Ukraine, as both Russia and China felt the west was in collapse and a strong push would assert a new era of Eastern dominance.
That second bit went comically wrong, but if Zelensky had taken that ride we might have a less pleasant timeline.
The US withdrew from Vietnam in 1975. The UN recognized the PRC over the ROC in 1971.
In fact, it was sort of Taiwan’s own policies that came back to kick them in the butt. In 1971, they were still ruled by the dictorial KMT (which wouldn’t reform into a proper democracy until another two decades, give or take a few years).
More saliently, both the KMT-ruled Taiwan and the PRC claimed to be the legitimate government of all of China, with the islands of Taiwan officially part of China. There are still references in the Constitution of the ROC today, see Chapter IX, Article 91 of https://english.president.gov.tw/Page/94 or Article 120 under Chapter XI of the same page.
Also see Article 2, Paragraph 2 of https://law.moj.gov.tw/ENG/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=Q0010001#:~:text=No%20people%20of%20the%20Mainland,the%20purposes%20of%20the%20permission.
So what happened in the UN in 1971 is that the UN itself decided to switch representation of who is “China” from the government based in Taiwan to the one based in Beijing. Prior to that, it was the opposite situation - the ROC (Taiwan) held the UN seat of China, including the permanent membership of the Security Council and veto power.
Of course, a lot has changed since 1971, and what justifications were made then don’t necessarily still make sense now.
I’m not so much against making the prc “China”, but kicking the rok out completely seems an overshoot, especially now.
I guess you mean roc (Republic of China on Taiwan), as rok refers to South Korea’s official name, the Republic of Korea, which has been a UN member since 1991.
I don’t disagree with you or the general premise of the article. Just this bit from the article,
Actually the UN has never incorporated Taiwan, just China.
As to the path forward, I think both the 1971 UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 (which was the instrument for the swap from ROC to PRC) and Taiwan’s participation in the Olympics and in the World Trade Organization are instructive.
The former was done as an interpretation, which prevented the US and the ROC from using their vetos. So if we want to get some sort of representation for the people of Taiwan into the UN, finding a way to pidgeonhole it as another interpretation could bypass a PRC veto.
Now, Taiwan participates in the Olympics as “Chinese Taipei” with an Olympics specific flag. LIkewise, Taiwan’s official name as a WTO member is as the “Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (Chinese Taipei)”.
Basically, admitting Taiwan to international organizations in this neutral way is a tried and true way of bypassing PRC opposition.
From wikipedia (but lacking a citation) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_United_Nations ,
So to admit Taiwan to the UN, it perhaps could be done via an interpretation that it was already a member as part of China, but now needs a separate delegation.
Additional things could be done to reduce PRC objections.
First, being admitted under the name of “Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (Chinese Taipei)”
And with the acknowledgement that it’s admission, while in practical terms the same as either full membership or at least full observer status, is technically something below it.
Because the resolution will likely need to state something along the lines of “This admission of a separate delegation shall not be used to admit or deny that Taiwan possesses independent statehood. Instead it is a special exception to the requirement that members and observers be fully internationally recognized independent sovereign states. Finally, the one China position of the PRC is acknowledged.”
This blocks the argument that Taiwan getting even observer status means it’s a sovereign state in violation of the one-China policy by a veto-welding member, but it also does not prevent or raise a barrier to evolving to full independent statehood if (for example) conditions within China and in the international community are ripe for it.
At the same time, having even this status in the UN would give the people living on Taiwan the desired direct voice in the UN, and potentially open the door to getting better representation elsewhere (such as better direct contact with the WHO).