Late last month, the United Nations again rejected Taiwan’s application for membership. In announcing its rejection, the United Nations referred to the 1971 resolution that spells out its “one China” policy. For too long now, Beijing has claimed that “Taiwan is part of China’s inherent territory and both sides broke up because of the civil war. And therefore it is justified that China has the right to take back Taiwan.” It is a cliche that is historically untrue and the foundation for many bad policies.
Prior to the 17th century, Taiwan was an isolated and unclaimed island. In 1624, the Dutch arrived, followed by the Spaniards in 1628, who colonized parts of the island. Cheng Cheng-kung, a general loyal to the fallen Ming dynasty in China, set up a government on Taiwan in 1662. Then the Manchurian Ching dynasty, the last imperial dynasty of China, defeated Cheng in 1683 and ruled Taiwan very loosely until 1895. In 1894, the Sino-Japanese war broke out, which resulted in the Ching dynasty ceding Taiwan to the Japanese after it lost the war. Japan controlled Taiwan from 1895 to 1945.
Upon the defeat of Japan at the end of World War II, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek was authorized by Gen. Douglas MacArthur to take over Taiwan in October 1945. Soon after that, civil war between the Kuomintang and the communists broke out on the Chinese mainland. In 1949, after being defeated by the communists, Chiang Kai-shek relocated the Kuomintang government to Taiwan. These are all historical facts; however, what happened next has clouded the issue of Taiwan’s status in the international community.
In September 1951, the Treaty of Peace with Japan was signed by 51 nations and Japan. Neither the Republic of China (Kuomintang government) nor the People’s Republic of China (communist regime) was invited to participate. The second article of this treaty stipulated that Japan renounced all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores. However, the treaty itself did not specify to which country these islands belong.
Since 1945, the Kuomintang government of the Republic of China has ruled Taiwan until this decade, when the Democratic Progressive Party gained a majority. Regardless of how the Treaty of Peace is interpreted, the fact remains that the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan for even a single day.
How then can the People’s Republic of China lay claim to Taiwan just because the Ching dynasty (Manchurian) ruled Taiwan before? Under this flawed reasoning, the Yuan dynasty (Mongolian Empire) seated at Beijing, which ruled most of Europe once, would be allowed to claim most of Europe. Also, Spain or Mexico could claim California.
Also, the exclusion of Taiwan is against the universal value of self-determination that the U.N.itself has vowed to safeguard. Taiwan and China have developed very differently during the 100-plus years of separation. Taiwan has its own government, territory and people. It has achieved its good standing in the international community based on its own merit and does not deserve to be lumped in with China.
Let’s examine the cases of North and South Korea, and East and West Germany. All were separated by World War II, but none of them claimed to represent the other side. The international community did not reject any side from joining the U.N. In both of these cases, both sides were evenly matched, having a similar population and military might.
In our case, there is a drastic contrast between Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China. China, as a rising power, has continually asserted its power to isolate Taiwan to the point that even the U.N. has strayed from its founding principals.
Finally, excluding Taiwan from the U.N. is simply unjust. It not only discounts Taiwan’s 23 million people from international consideration, but also prevents one of the most able-bodied nations to contribute to the greater good. Instead, Taiwan’s exclusion proves that if you are bigger and stronger, you can bully your way into getting what you want. Wasn’t that what the U.N. was created to stop?
DAVID LU works in the press division of the Taipei Economic & Cultural Office in San Francisco. He wrote this article for the Mercury News.
