Sovereignty
can be put at risk in increments
By Chen Hurng-yu
Saturday, Jul 12, 2008, Page 8
Ever since the Republic of China (ROC) was replaced by the People’s Republic of
China (PRC) as the representative of China at the UN in 1971, the ROC’s de jure
authority has been limited to Taiwan proper, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. Since
then, the decreasing number of Taiwan’s democratic allies has had an impact on
its status as a legal entity under international law.
But this did not happen because the ROC withdrew from the UN. It was due to the
fact that the ROC failed to newly demarcate its territory. Because overlapping
territory led to competition with the PRC, the international community has not
been able reach decisions on the matter.
Today, however, the international community has reached a consensus: One country
has one government. These days, it is not acceptable for a colonial state to
enter an international organization together with its colonies in the way it was
before World War II. Based on this principle, the international community does
not support the coexistence of two governments under the “one China” framework.
In other words, the ROC and the PRC hold that their territories are overlapping
and that there are two separate governments.
This view is not supported in the international arena and the reason is very
clear.
If every country made this claim, rebellions and confrontations would occur,
causing chaos in the international order.
Such wishful thinking is indeed in violation of international norms and
protocols.
Since 1971, quite a few people have been unable to properly reflect on this
question: If we still assert sovereignty over China, then the international
community will consider Taiwan to be part of the PRC because there is an overlap
between the two countries’ conception of sovereignty.
Therefore, China is justified to threaten Taiwan with the “one China” principle
because it sees the Taiwan issue as a domestic issue, and thus the international
community cannot intervene.
Three variables are worth considering: the characteristics of a sovereign and
independent state, the tributary relationship between Vietnam and China during
the Qing Dynasty and Taiwan’s current status.
Taiwan’s situation is similar to that of Vietnam during the Qing Dynasty, and
even worse in some ways.
For example, Vietnam was permitted to develop relations with other countries
without China intruding, nor did China interfere in Vietnam’s domestic affairs.
The Qing government would address Vietnamese officials by their official titles
with the exception of the king, and recognized Vietnam as a separate territory
with borders.
Today, China sees Taiwan as part of its territory and would remove international
borders between the two sides. China never refers to Taiwanese officials by
their official titles and intervenes in its domestic politics.
In order to gain more exposure in the international community, Taiwan has made
many concessions on sovereignty issues such as the country’s title and
entitlements, and has gradually slipped in the direction of becoming a Chinese
tributary government. We should be alert, as these changes are incremental.
Finally, I would emphasize that any changes in the country’s title and status
require approval from the legislature or should be decided through a referendum
to gain public support.
Chen Hurng-yu is a professor at Tamkang
University’s Graduate Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.