Taiwan has no right to join United Nations: China

It is China that has no right to be in the UN much less hold a Permanent seat on the UNSC.

Taiwan (The Republic of China) joined the United Nations as a founding member on 24 October 1945.

China needs to study some actual history. History is when happened, not what you want to have happened.

Oh, and Taiwan is a country.

China needs to study some actual history. History is what happened, not what you want to have happened.

Oh, and Taiwan is a country.

Ossan has it down and it is true.

China needs to study some actual history.

100% agree!

But the problem is that China "writes" its own interpretation of history and also teaches his own interpretation of history at their schools.

And also issue its own interpretation of land-maps.

The United States has long called for Taiwan's inclusion in U.N. activities.

More blatant hypocrisy from the United States. This is the country that voted against admitting the internationally recognised state of Palestine to the UN, even just as an observer state.

I've heard lots of great things about Taiwan and hope to visit there someday. China, not so much.

Taiwan has no right to join United Nations: China

China saying it doesn't want this makes me want it more.

Kind of a Streisand effect type thing going on there.

The United Nations is an international governmental organization composed of sovereign states... 

And what determines a sovereign state? From Article 1 of the UN Charter:

To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples

The principle of "self-determination of peoples" tells me it is up to the people of Taiwan whether they want to become an independent state or not. Give it up, China!

While it may have seemed smart at the time, the abandonment of Taiwan, started by Nixon and completed by Carter was a strategic error on the part of the US.

It could have established a precedent that would leave the island in a stronger place now and the dirty little secret in the PRC (not so little) is that their economy would still be nothing without the American consumer. If we had maintained relations with Taiwan, we still could have sold and bought as we are now.

Taiwan Beef noodles for the win. The country Taiwan is China. The CCP is secondary and thugs.

That is exactly why they should join.

Taiwan sees clearly what is happening in Hong Kong. 'Nuff said.

Everything was fine until the US started stirring things up again.

Taiwan should be admitted to the UN. No question. Anyone who disagrees is a pro-Communist China supporter.

It is shameful that the vast majority of the world does not diplomatically recognize Taiwan. Until this happens, sadly they will not be admitted.

Boycott China.

Boycott the Genocide Games 2022.

The US should not have switched recognition back in '79. I remember when it happened and thought it was a bad move. The Chinese Nationalists of Taiwan were a permanent member of the Security Council.

China keeps pushing everyone's buttons, these countries are going to start pushing back. More support for a much friendlier ally Taiwan.

The United States switched recognition in 1979 to Beijing.

Why did the US kick out Taiwan, a founding member of the UN?

As far as I know, Taiwan which was then known as Republic of China was one of the founding members of the League of Nations, which eventually became the United Nations.

Why did the US kick out one of the founding members of the League of Nations that eventually became the United Nations? The UN is the US.

Funny thing is many countries denied Taiwan decades ago who are in the same list now. It is a little bit naive to believe what politicians are saying. It is all interest!

As far as I know, Taiwan which was then known as Republic of China was one of the founding members of the League of Nations

I don't think that's quite right. Mainland China was an original member of the League of Nations. At that time, Taiwan was a Japanese colony.

The US should not have switched recognition back in '79. I remember when it happened and thought it was a bad move. The Chinese Nationalists of Taiwan were a permanent member of the Security Council.

That the US can deny sovereignty of a nation based on their political interests shows that it is the US who decides who can be a nation based on the changing politics of the US.

Au contraire, China is part of Taiwan....

Taiwan is part of China so is already in the UN. Does Texas get a seat? Hokkaido?

Only a handful of minnow states recognize Taiwan as a state. Scotland has a better chance of getting UN membership as a state.

Taiwan is part of China so is already in the UN.

That is probably the view of Chinese nationalists - both the communist type on the mainland and the non-communist nationalists in Taiwan - they just differ about who should control the place. But what about the overall view of the people of Taiwan? Is that not what matters?

Does Texas get a seat? Hokkaido?

If the people of those places choose to become an independent state, why not? Countries that were formerly part of the USSR are now UN members. National territories don't have to be permanent.

USA needs to say Taiwan is a country. China's negative effect on every institution in the world holds us back

Time to question what the heck UN is

Especially for those who often equate UN's so called part-time special reporters to Int'l community's consensus to prove fake histories

@albaleo

And what determines a sovereign state? From Article 1 of the UN Charter:

To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples

The principle of "self-determination of peoples" tells me it is up to the people of Taiwan whether they want to become an independent state or not. Give it up, China!

For better or worse, the UN Charter doesn't create a private right for every separatist group around the world to unilaterally secede. It's not up to separatists and colonising populations to decide amongst themselves whether they are a distinct peoples entitled to self government under the UN Charter. This is something only the UN can determine, like they did in the 1960s when various colonised peoples were officially recognised through general assembly resolution 1514.

But what about the overall view of the people of Taiwan? Is that not what matters?

If we accept the view that only the current inhabitants of Taiwan (or any other territory) have the right to determine the its status, what is your position on Crimea or the Kuril Islands dispute or northern Cyprus or Israeli settlements in the occupied territories? Should the current inhabitants of these disputed territories also have the final say, or should we instead resolve these disputes using well established principles of international law even if the results aren't always in our favour? For the sake of peace and stability, I think it should be the latter.

Taiwan has no right to join United Nations: China

Thankfully that determination is not up to China. Nor is it up to the US. UN membership is determined by a vote of more than those two nations. Both have diplomatic allies who will vote with them in a block and there are neutral nations and semi neutral nations who could vote either way.

Regardless of what anyone thinks should be their "place" in things, as it stands right now they are not ruled by China or it's laws. Taiwan is a self determining, self run, self defended state that uses democracy to elect governments.

Any proposed vote will not be to determine history or rewriting it, but if Taiwan can tick the boxes needed to allow it to be included. That there is an outstanding claim to ownership by China is not relevant. That has been the case for over 72 years. Taiwan's people clearly wish self representation and do not wish to be ruled by the CCP, as they could have expressed such a desire at any time over the past decades. The right to self determination of independent states is a UN cornerstone.

I would vote to allow Taiwan to rejoin the UN as Taiwan not as the Republic of China. There is only one China and for decades it has not included the Island of Taiwan. That should be allowed to continue for as long as the people wish it.

albaleoToday  06:24 pm JST

As far as I know, Taiwan which was then known as Republic of China was one of the founding members of the League of Nations

I don't think that's quite right. Mainland China was an original member of the League of Nations. At that time, Taiwan was a Japanese colony.

Nonsense.

The Republic of China (now Taiwan) which controlled mainland China at the time was a founding member of the League of Nations on January 1920.

The Republic of China (now Taiwan) was a founding member of the United Nations on October 1945.

The Peoples Republic of China (Communist China/Red China) which was founded as a nation in 1949, became a member of the UN in 1971, replacing the Republic of China (Taiwan) and taking it's Permanent Seat on the UNSC.

As China has no right to build artificial islands in international seas and slaughter many Tibetians and Islamic minorities.

The face of hypocrisy in 2021 is China,a real offspring of the old Soviet rethotic.

In reality it is not the UN that decides. It is the US or possibly China that decides. Everyone else will follow one or the other. You may think your country has a say but no, not really.

For better or worse, the UN Charter doesn't create a private right for every separatist group around the world to unilaterally secede.

Taiwan did not secede but the mainland did by a revolution to overthrow the legal government there. It did not overthrow the national forces in Taiwan. The war ended and so did the Mainlands claims to Taiwan. Secession is not at issue in this instance.

If we accept the view that only the current inhabitants of Taiwan (or any other territory) have the right to determine the its status, what is your position on Crimea or the Kuril Islands dispute or northern Cyprus or Israeli settlements in the occupied territories?

All have independent issues not relevant to the others. This is about Taiwan continuing its journey of growth while independent of any other nation. If you claim ownership of Taiwan by the Chinese mainland then Mongolia can claim ownership of large portions of China on the same basis of prior ownership in the past. Where does it end? Borders have changed through the history of our species and they will continue to do so. The main difference is that now it is expected to happen by consensus like the EU and not through conquest. You cant have it both ways.

It would be far better to hear the UN come out loud-and-clear to China:

"keep your filthy hands off Taiwan, stop threatening to take-over the island nation and it's law-abiding freedom-loving peaceful people".

The democracies of the world would welcome a more pro-active approach taken by the monolithic administrative UN - after all, we all contribute to their vast running costs, so it would be a welcome intervention.

@Peter14

All have independent issues not relevant to the others.

You're dodging the question because you don't want to deal with the consequences of your position. If the people of Taiwan can vote to be independent, why not the people of Crimea or Israeli settlers in the Westbank? Just like the United States, you want to ignore international law and make up the rules as you go so that they're always in your favour.

If you claim ownership of Taiwan by the Chinese mainland then Mongolia can claim ownership of large portions of China on the same basis of prior ownership in the past. Where does it end?

I don't think you understand the role historical evidence of occupation plays in territorial disputes. It's not relevant. China's territorial claims over Taiwan are not based on evidence of historical occupation. They are based on clear unambiguous international agreements and well established principles of international law.

Borders have changed through the history of our species and they will continue to do so. The main difference is that now it is expected to happen by consensus like the EU and not through conquest. You cant have it both ways.

The main difference is that in modern times borders only change through established rules of international law.

Your position in favour of recognising an unlimited right to self-determination is effectively reintroducing conquest. Because, if I support armed separatist groups in taking control of a territory, inviting in those citizens who support independence, expelling those who oppose it, and then holding a referendum to break away, I've effectively taken territory by military conquest.

Although China continues to claim Taiwan as a "runaway province" and it's seeking sovereignty and independance as "separatism", the truth is that China (CCP) has never controlled Taiwan. Any effort by China to supress Taiwan indepence by military force would in reality be an invasion.

UN should be disbanded and a new body created that reflects modern geopolitics. Having undemocratic China and Russia with a veto power is unacceptable, there should be no members with such powers only a majority vote.

Expelling Taiwan from UN was and is a mistake which world powers did.

quercetumToday  06:03 pm JST

The United States switched recognition in 1979 to Beijing.

Why did the US kick out Taiwan, a founding member of the UN?

Because the US opened up diplomatic relations with "Red China" in 1972 and when Mao died in 1976, his successor Deng Xiaoping was pushing to open up "Red China" to the world to investments while adopting a less draconian Communist ideology and allowing for a small, measured and controlled form of capitalism into the country.

The US saw a huge future economic opportunity in this (2 billion potential future customers and massive infrastructure building opportunities etc.) and basically stabbed Taiwan in the back.

@OssanAmerica

Although China continues to claim Taiwan as a "runaway province" and it's seeking sovereignty and independance as "separatism", the truth is that China (CCP) has never controlled Taiwan.

Why exactly is this relevant? The doctrine of territorial integrity of states dictates that after a civil conflict, the new government inherits the entirety of the old state according to its pre-conflict borders. The fact that there are pockets of resistance where the new government has no control does not mean the new government loses those territories.

When Zaire was succeeded by the Democratic Republic of the Congo after the civil war, nobody suggested that the DRC should lose the provinces where Mobutu loyalists managed to hold out for years.

Dear CCP, this is how you make up for the century of humiliation?? By invading and killing other Chinese??

Really stupid strategy if you ask me.

The day that the United Nations recognizes the Taliban (thus throwing the women of Afghanistan away forever) but won't acknowledge Taiwan, is the day the U.N. must be disbanded.

We really need to stop being hesitant about China. China grows stronger and bigger by the day with the money and jobs the rest of the world sends them, so if anyone plans to draw a line somewhere, today will be easier than tomorrow. As bad as it is China has a big advantage by being a dictatorship, it allows them to plan further ahead and focus on their plans while our leaders have to spend their time fighting each other. Sadly I think we need a big scale escalation to happen before we get together and do something.

albaleo...

If the people of those places choose to become an independent state, why not?

Sorry, I must have missed Taiwan declaring independence.....When was it? :)

A silent vote by the UN is needed to disarm china's predictable trade war on countries who back Taiwan.

Taiwan has every right to be in the UN. China, given it's appalling human rights abuses, does not.

Let’s not forget that it was the US (President Richard Nixon and his Foreign Secretary and Nobel Prize Laureate Henry Kissinger) that turned their backs on Taiwan and moved the Peoples Republic of China in the very position they hold today. At that time, they had the excuse that Taiwan as well was ruled by a Dictator (Chiang Kai-shek and his Kuomintang) but on the other hand that never prevented the US from having good relations with a state. Therefore, before talking of History, it is always a good idea that do a little research first.

M3M3M3

If the people of Taiwan can vote to be independent, why not the people of Crimea or Israeli settlers in the Westbank?

Taiwan is already a functionally independent state and has been for 72 years.

Crimea is Ukraine territory that had minority Russian citizens living there and was taken over by Russia with force of arms. Illegally with no care for the Ukrainian citizens wishes only the minority Russian ones.

Israeli settlements are illegally built on Palestinian lands and recognized as such by UN security council resolution.

Neither Crimea not Illegal Israeli settlements have operated as independent states with their own money, taxes and defense forces. Taiwan has.

China's territorial claims over Taiwan are not based on evidence of historical occupation. They are based on clear unambiguous international agreements and well established principles of international law.

Not true. They are Chinese interpretations and not considered valid by the vast majority.

The main difference is that in modern times borders only change through established rules of international law.

Again not true. Crimea was conquered by Russia through violence not via international laws. Same for illegal Israeli settlements in Palestinian lands. Settled against international laws.

Your arguments make the assumption that Taiwan is Chinese territory. It is not. It has not been since the separation by the CCP from the legitimate government of China through revolution. The CCP took China's mainland via war. It did not take Taiwan which remained the territory of the legitimate government. It still is not CCP territory and remains independent of the mainland run by them.

The doctrine of territorial integrity of states dictates that after a civil conflict, the new government inherits the entirety of the old state according to its pre-conflict borders.

Rubbish. It suits China to take that position. There is no such doctrine. Look at Yugoslavia and how that ended after war. Split up into different sovereign states.

If the US formally recognized Taiwan as a country, heads in the mainland would all explode! Just look at what happens when maps showing Taiwan as a country are published. The mainland CCP go nuts.

Does Texas get a seat?

Not while is agrees to be part of the US, but Texas is different from the other states in the USA. The Republic of Texas joined the US through a treaty. It can, in theory, choose to leave the US. Legal scholars have varied opinions about that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_annexation This joining wasn't without outside pressures. Texas needed the support of the US against Mexico and UK efforts.

The United States has long called for Taiwan's inclusion in U.N. activities.

The US should have thought of that before Carter threw the Taiwanese under the bus in favor of his Socialist buddies in Beijing. Unfortunately, biden follows closely in Carter’s footsteps in his feckless handling of China policy. The world will be lucky to get through the next three years and three months without a major conflict over Taiwan precipitated by biden’s bumbling policy choices.

Fifty years ago, the United Nations voted to expel Taiwan - the Republic of China and admit the People’s Republic of China.

Bad hair day. 

Very complex circumstances, played out between multiple governments and numerous individuals, enveloping many lesser historic events.

High politics at its worst.

So, are we, as an international community, locked forever into an irrational justification narrative, from those who would use historical events to exclude any modern-day intervention?

Are we, as an international community, compelled to acknowledge and conform to those countries who would irrationally compel us to conform to their ideals, as World Reality 2.0?

Or can we move ahead as an international community and reconsider our past mistakes? And correct them.

Recognize Taiwan as a sovereign nation. And let their people finally escape a bad hair day from fifty years ago.

China has no right to ,be in the United Nations, China doesn't agree with any nation they do as they please with out question

Everything was fine until the US started stirring things up again.

not really , 20yrs after HongKong was handed back to China look whats happened there,

a puppet democratic government with China pulling the strings. Does anybody think Taiwan would be any different!?

The father of a good friend of mine was a criminal prosecutor for the Hong Kong governement, the day it was handed back to China he said its all over, he moved back to his home country a couple years later. He knew what was coming and could see the changes in the legal system even at that early stage.

Honestly, as things stand right now, they don’t. They don’t have any significant recognition of foreign bodies as a country. Why should the UN recognize Taiwan as a country when almost none of the member states do.

If Taiwan really wants to be a member nation, they need to actually declare independence and get the support of other nations. As far as we have seen, they don’t want to do that because the status quo is much more beneficial for basically everyone involved. They lose out on symbolic representation mostly. There are those in Taiwan who would welcome a movement towards independence, but they aren’t even a plurality right now.

So, the US takes the position that Palestine, which represents the majority of the population of Palestine and the 'breakaway province' of Israel shouldn't be able to participate in international institutions, but Taiwan, which, as the breakaway province of China, represents the small minority of the population of China, should be able to.

Yes, absolutely no evidence in those two positions that the US is taking them for anything other than the highest of principles and an unshakable commitment to human rights, just as there's no sign that the Republican Party is concerned about 'election integrity' and drawing American electoral districts for anything other than the highest of principles and an unshakable commitment to getting an accurate representation of the will of the people.

No courage to exclude the virus spreaders and include a democratic country again, that even was a U.N founding member…how cowardly and shameful for the big majority of countries, thinking only of some trade , money and boot licking.

@Peter14

Taiwan is already a functionally independent state and has been for 72 years.

The passage of time does not, by itself, undermine China's territorial claims. The ICJ regularly hears sovereignty disputes that date back centuries. China has spent 72 years trying to resolve the civil war peacefully. To hold this against them would go against the principle that violence should be a last resort.

Crimea is Ukraine territory that had minority Russian citizens living there and was taken over by Russia with force of arms. Illegally with no care for the Ukrainian citizens wishes only the minority Russian ones.

Crimea is actually majority Russian and the overwhelming majority supported declaring independence. The interference in Ukrainian internal affairs by arming one side of a civil war is certainly illegal under international law, but why don't you say the same about America's continued arming of Taiwan?

Israeli settlements are illegally built on Palestinian lands and recognized as such by UN security council resolution.

Yes, true.

Neither Crimea not Illegal Israeli settlements have operated as independent states with their own money, taxes and defense forces. Taiwan has.

Money, taxes, and armed forces are good to have, but they aren't necessary conditions for statehood. In fact, many of the states which still recognise the ROC (Palau, Nauru, Tuvalu etc) have no armed forces and rely heavily on foreign aid. They are still recognised as states.

Not true. They are Chinese interpretations and not considered valid by the vast majority.

Who doesn't consider them valid? The overwhelming majority of UN member states recognise the PRC as the sole successor state to the ROC.

Your arguments make the assumption that Taiwan is Chinese territory. It is not. It has not been since the separation by the CCP from the legitimate government of China through revolution. The CCP took China's mainland via war. It did not take Taiwan which remained the territory of the legitimate government. It still is not CCP territory and remains independent of the mainland run by them.

What do you mean by 'separation by the CCP from the legitimate government'? There is no legitimate or illegitimate government in the context of internal civil conflict. There are only groups vying for recognition. The CCP defeated the ROC in the civil war and formed a new government called the PRC which is the successor state of the ROC. The PRC has assumed all outstanding debts and obligations of the ROC government and inhereted the pre-civil war borders. The majority of UN members recognise the PRC.

The only way your position makes sense is if you claim the ROC hasn't lost the civil war yet because it's still too early to declare a victor. A bit silly, but you're entitled to hold it if you do.

Rubbish. It suits China to take that position. There is no such doctrine.

The doctrine is better known by its latin maxim, Uti possidetis juris.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uti_possidetis_juris

Look at Yugoslavia and how that ended after war. Split up into different sovereign states.

The difference is that Yugoslavia didn't win the civil war, and didn't even exist at the end of it. In this case, China won the civil war and they're here to claim the territory they're entitled to. Had Yugoslavia won the war, they would also have the right to demand the return of Croatia, Slovenia etc.

Sorry, I must have missed Taiwan declaring independence.....When was it? :)

Mr Kipling, did I say the people of Taiwan had declared independence? I preceded my general comment with an "if".

If the people of those places choose to become an independent state....

Governments will be the death of us all.

This is a great fight. Frazier and Ali. So far the USA is acting like the challenger throwing punches left and right with China the champion completely unfazed when it should be the other way around.

First round Obama sends a carrier to the South China Seas. China starts building islands and asserts itself sending the message to the US: you will not control these sea lanes. No embargoes here. We’ve learned from your 23 year embargo and sanctions on us. China responds. The islands are still there

Second round Hong Kong starts the umbrella movement culminating in new national security laws. Movement backed by hopeful US lawmakers. Hong Kong isn’t in the news anymore. China responds and survives and does not get lured into a Tiananmen crackdown.

Third round US starts accusing China of the genocide of Uighurs in Xinjiang. Six years and no evidence of concentration camps and mass killings. Attempts to boycott the 2022 Winter Olympics are made but the games will still be held. China responds.

Fourth round - Trumps trade war. Nothing needs to be said except the trade deficit is even greater than before. China scores.

Fifth round - Banning of Huawei and campaigning allies to do so. China starts producing its own chips. US chip makers and auto manufacturers suffer. Chinese market lost to Chinese chip makers. China scores.

Sixth round - The Wuhan lab leak. US claims China is responsible for all the deaths in the world some 4 million. China out successfully contains the spread of the virus. US suffers a blow. The highest number of deaths and cases in the world. China survives.

Seventh round - The issue of Taiwan. Tensions rise and carriers cruise. All polls show Taiwanese do not favor independence. China states reunification will be peaceful. China survives and does not get lured into war.

Eighth round - China successfully tests Intercontinental Hypersonic Missiles. US caught by surprises but saves face by not reporting August test until October when it too would conduct tests. US hypersonic missile tests fails. China scores.

All these unsuccessful attempts by the US must be infuriating and sobering. Tibet unsuccessful. Xinjiang unsuccessful. Hong Kong unsuccessful. South China Seas unsuccessful. Taiwan unsuccessful. Wuhan Lab unsuccessful. Huawei unsuccessful. Hypersonic missile tests unsuccessful. Trade war unsuccessful. Defamation unsuccessful.

Taiwan will remain in its current status quo. It’s democratic and it’s what the people want.

Here is the secret that most do not seem to know: the way to conquer China is not through causing unrest in Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, or Taiwan, but through the Korean Peninsula. The US does not seem to be aware of this. It keeps trying the same old play. Like a running game that’s not working. Three and out. It’s not working and will not work.

The Mongols, the Qing, and the Japanese all successfully invaded China by crossing the Yalu River. It is why the Chinese and the ethnic Korean-Chinese had to fight in the Korean War. The Korean Peninsula is how and where you enter China and not along the coasts where missiles will rain down on you.

China is getting ready to land a blow to the US. I can guarantee it will not be military but economic.

We (the world) beg to differ Mr China.

As to why the USA in 1979 helped China replace Taiwan in the UN:

In short, it was part of a secret deal made by the Nixon/Kissinger regime to broker an end to the Vietnam War.

Nixon/Kissinger achieved "peace with honor" by persuading China - with promises of industrial development, gold, long term trade deals, and a place at the UN- to pressure North Vietnam to ease up on their offensive so that the US could pull out of Vietnam and not be seen as retreating or surrendering. Of course, once the number of American troops reached a low enough level, the North resumed the offensive and the US had to hurriedly evacuate, leaving many behind. Kissinger in particular profited, the Americans lost face, and eventually our manufacturing industries, which is why all we now buy is made in Communist China.

But Tricky Dick got his "Peace with Honor"

So, the US takes the position that Palestine

Its no comparison. The UN gave the Palestinians a country and they rejected it because they didn’t want to accept Israel. In the case of Taiwan, the UN recognized them and later pulled the rug out from underneath them.

The United states has long called for Taiwans inclusion in the United nations activities ??

But -Blinken reiterated that the USA still only recognized Beijing.

Its all hypocritical and just about using Taiwan to keep up with the Jones.

And calling it independent and free

Its all hypocritical and just about using Taiwan to keep up with the Jones.

biden’s in a tough spot. He has to pretend to be tough on Beijing knowing that with his family’s past shady business dealings he can’t make them too angry or risk Xi’s ire. Hunter Biden did business directly with a state entity. Given his affinity for drugs and prostitution there’s a good bet that there are embarrassing videos of the presidents son during his business trips to China flying on Air Force 2.

@M3M3M3

China has spent 72 years trying to resolve the civil war peacefully. To hold this against them would go against the principle that violence should be a last resort.

That is your interpretation. The fact is China could not take Taiwan during it's revolution and has tried to take it by any other means since. It has no right to Taiwan. The world recognizes this.

Crimea is actually majority Russian

It is now that many Ukrainians had to flee.

and the overwhelming majority supported declaring independence.

A referendum held after the take over and after many Ukrainians fled and could not vote due to intimidation. The world knows the Russian version of democracy is to rig the vote.

Money, taxes, and armed forces are good to have, but they aren't necessary conditions for statehood. In fact, many of the states which still recognise the ROC (Palau, Nauru, Tuvalu etc) have no armed forces and rely heavily on foreign aid. They are still recognised as states.

Not relevant to the conversation. Taiwan has been a functioning independent state Under the rule of the same government structure since before the CCP revolted on the mainland.

Who doesn't consider them valid? The overwhelming majority of UN member states recognise the PRC as the sole successor state to the ROC.

Do they really? Signing a document to ensure trade riches does not mean they agree with it. Is that moral? No. Is it what happened? Yes it is. The majority of the world considers Taiwan to be independent of the CCP and the majority of the worlds inhabitants agree that Taiwan is independent.

My government signed the same document decades ago. My government today does not agree with it but will not correct that and potentially lose billions in trade and many jobs. They would rather endure the shame of it and carry on as is with vocal support for Taiwan's independence where they can slip it in.

The CCP defeated the ROC in the civil war and formed a new government called the PRC which is the successor state of the ROC.

On the mainland. Taiwan was never conquered during the conflict and the ROC never surrendered.

So with the civil war over the borders changed and two separate and sovereign entities emerged.

Taiwan could not retake the mainland and China could not take Taiwan. Time China accepted what happened and move on.

The doctrine is better known by its latin maxim, Uti possidetis juris.

An ancient Roman law is a principal but not actual law in modern times. The Roman empire is long gone.

The difference is that Yugoslavia didn't win the civil war, and didn't even exist at the end of it. In this case, China won the civil war and they're here to claim the territory they're entitled.

The ROC did still exist and still exists 72 years later. China ended the civil war and is only entitled to the territory it took until the war ended. You want what you couldnt take just given to you. Making 24 million Taiwanese homeless and stateless. Should they be shipped off en mass to the Palestinian territory of Gaza? Taiwan held off the revolution and won its independance the day the war ended.

Your opinions are not held by many people outside of Chinese nationalists. Your entitled to them but just know the overwhelming majority of the worlds population do not agree with your position or the CCP position on Taiwan.

@Peter14

The fact is China could not take Taiwan during it's revolution... So with the civil war over the borders changed and two separate and sovereign entities emerged... Taiwan has been a functioning independent state... China ended the civil war and is only entitled to the territory it took until the war ended.

You need to ask yourself one question: If the theory you are putting forward is correct and unassailable, why has Taiwan never adopted this position?

Taiwan has never declared independence, never claimed that two sovereign entities emerged after the civil war, never claimed that the civil war was even over, and never claimed to be entitled only to the lands it held once hostilities ceased. Why? Could it be that your theory is too simplistic and flies in the face of established international law?

Do they really? Signing a document to ensure trade riches does not mean they agree with it. Is that moral? No. Is it what happened? Yes it is.

China was an impoverished backwater when most of the world recognised the PRC so to say that it was done to ensure trade riches is inaccurate.

Instead of looking at countries like the US or the USSR which based recognition on geo-political considerations, let's look at more neutral and responsible members of the international community like Finland, Switzerland, Denmark or Norway. All of these countries recognised the PRC government in the early 1950s, not later in the 1970s. Did they do it for trade riches? No. They did it because it was obvious that the ROC had been displaced by the PRC and that international law required recognition of the new government.

An ancient Roman law is a principal but not actual law in modern times. The Roman empire is long gone.

Uti possidetis juris is one of the cornerstones of modern international law. Here is the ICJ invoking it in the Burkino Faso/ Mali dispute from 2013:

https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/69

Your opinions are not held by many people outside of Chinese nationalists. Your entitled to them but just know the overwhelming majority of the worlds population do not agree with your position or the CCP position on Taiwan.

This is laughable when the vast majority of UN member state governments, diplomats, and the lawyers who advise them clearly lean towards my position. The uninformed opinions of the general public aren't particularly helpful in resolving this dispute.

China dictating to the world again. How long do we really put up with this.? Try explaining the situation to a 12 year old just to reaffirm to yourself how ridiculous it is, being made by a bully to cancel a country.

Literally insane. Taiwan, the free world has your back , even if the feeble politicians cant!

@Peter14

The majority of the world considers Taiwan to be independent of the CCP and the majority of the worlds inhabitants agree that Taiwan is independent.

You say this often, but it simply isn't true.

The majority of Taiwanese don't even support independence (as of the most recent polls, a staggering...5% do) nevermind the population of the world as a whole. Or does the Taiwanese position on Taiwanese independence not matter if other countries are deciding for them? People don't actually care about what the Taiwanese people want, they just want a chip that they can use against China.

Even if that were true that the majority of the world's inhabitants agree, that doesn't mean much if no actual government recognizes them.

@M3M3M3

Taiwan has never declared independence, never claimed that two sovereign entities emerged after the civil war, never claimed that the civil war was even over, and never claimed to be entitled only to the lands it held once hostilities ceased.

ROC claimed ownership of Taiwan and the mainland for many years and was a permanent member of the UN security council with veto. Taiwan was not the usurper the CCP was. Tawain/ROC has been in existance since long before the CCP. ROC has always been independent both before and after the revolution. When was the last time a long established existing state declared independence?

China was an impoverished backwater when most of the world recognised the PRC so to say that it was done to ensure trade riches is inaccurate.

Cheap labor is precisly whay there were riches to be had with their manufacturing costs able to price out all competition. My statement is accurate.

Uti possidetis juris is one of the cornerstones of modern international law. Here is the ICJ invoking it in the Burkino Faso/ Mali dispute from 2013:

It is not international law, but it is a principal that seems to support China's current position so it adopts it as immutable.

This is laughable when the vast majority of UN member state governments, diplomats, and the lawyers who advise them clearly lean towards my position.

Ask the people. The people make and break governments and all their hangers on. Democracies are different to China. The people do not hold your opinion and it is they that will bring down the governments that fail to defend Taiwan politically and for any that support China taking over Taiwan.

Keep hanging on to the Chinese dream. It is just a dream. When push comes to shove China will see the resolve of the people of the world and action will be taken to defend freedom. Nobody in the Government of my nation support Taiwan being taken over by China. Not one. My country is not alone. Hide behind meaningless old documents but you fool nobody saying they are supported by anyone outside of China and its few allies.

@Addfwyn

You say this often, but it simply isn't true.

The majority of Taiwanese don't even support independence (as of the most recent polls, a staggering...5% do) nevermind the population of the world as a whole. Or does the Taiwanese position on Taiwanese independence not matter if other countries are deciding for them?

How many favor CCP rule? Most prefer to stay free of the CCP and that is indisputable. Since China threatens to destroy them if they actualy make some sort of declaration of independence, the majority want to keep peace.

"The question about national identity showed that 89.9 percent identify themselves as Taiwanese and 4.6 percent as Chinese, while 1 percent consider themselves to be both, the poll showed."

"Taiwan can only transition to a normal country by becoming the “Republic of Taiwan” — not by keeping the name Republic of China (ROC), he said, adding that the poll proves that normalization is the public’s common aspiration."

https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2021/08/11/2003762406

Taiwanese will fight China to keep their freedom and right to choose. They do not consider themselves to be Chinese.

People around the world stay up to date on this issue but much is banned from the Chinese internet so harder for them to see. The CCP tells its people it is reunification when in fact it would be invasion. The 24 million people of Taiwan have the right to continue to be free. China has no right to change that.

@Peter14

ROC claimed ownership of Taiwan and the mainland for many years and was a permanent member of the UN security council with veto.

Yes, but the world is not frozen in time. When it became clear that the ROC had lost the civil war, the PRC became the recognised government of China by a majority of UN members.

Taiwan was not the usurper the CCP was. Tawain/ROC has been in existance since long before the CCP. ROC has always been independent both before and after the revolution.

What do you mean by a usurper? Throughout history governments have been replaced by revolutions and coups. There are established rules to deal with the recognition of these new governments.

When was the last time a long established existing state declared independence?

I think you're confusion stems from the failure to distinguish between two separate (but sometimes closely related) concepts; diplomatic recognition of a new government, and continued recognition of a pre-existing state. The borders of a pre-existing state do not automatically change when a new government of the state is diplomatically recognised. Taiwan was recognised as part of the Chinese state under the ROC government prior to 1950-1970, and that did not change when China became the PRC under the newly recognised communist government.

The fact that one faction of the civil war fled to Taiwan after the civil war had been effectively lost does not automatically sever Taiwan from China. To use my previous example from the Congo, the diplomatic recognition of the Kabila government as the new government of the former Zaire meant that they inhereted the entirety of the state. The areas where armed forces of the former government continued to exercise control and fight the new government were not internationally recognised as being a smaller continuation of Zaire.

It is not international law, but it is a principal that seems to support China's current position so it adopts it as immutable.

If you're not willing to accept that a principle invoked by the International Court of Justice is established international law, I'm not sure what else I can say to convince you.

Ask the people. The people make and break governments and all their hangers on. Democracies are different to China. The people do not hold your opinion and it is they that will bring down the governments that fail to defend Taiwan politically and for any that support China taking over Taiwan.

The people of Taiwan are certainly entitled to declare independence from China if that's what they want. But the Chinese people are also entitled to resist this. What is not in dispute is the illegality under international law of arming and supporting separatist movements by foreign states, as the United States appears to be doing in Taiwan.

U.S. President Joe Biden last week told a televised forum that the United States was ready to defend Taiwan from any Chinese invasion.

Those comments were quickly walked back by the White House amid warnings from China, continuing a strategy of ambiguity on whether it would intervene militarily if China attacked.

His handlers let him off the leash, and surprisingly he actually said something meaningful this time. But the cabale that controls Biden will not stand up to the CCP.

All these unsuccessful attempts by the US must be infuriating and sobering. Tibet unsuccessful. Xinjiang unsuccessful. Hong Kong unsuccessful. South China Seas unsuccessful. Taiwan unsuccessful. Wuhan Lab unsuccessful. Huawei unsuccessful. Hypersonic missile tests unsuccessful. Trade war unsuccessful. Defamation unsuccessful.

That’s what CCP propaganda looks like, creating a myth of victory from failures!!! Fact is President Biden is traveling the world and Xi is scared to go out of China, he might get overthrown if he does.

China is getting ready to land a blow to the US. I can guarantee it will not be military but economic.

China’s isolation grows by the day, things aren’t looking too good for them!!!

@M3M3M3

Yes, but the world is not frozen in time. When it became clear that the ROC had lost the civil war, the PRC became the recognised government of China by a majority of UN members.

No that is not correct. The war ended in 1949 but recognition in the UN did not come until 1971. It did not come about by realization that the CCP had over run the mainland in 1949. It came about to bring an end to the Vietnam war and for trade opportunities to move manufacturing to cheap labor China.

I remember as a child the many items made in Taiwan that were imported by my country. That changed to made in China after it was recognized by Australia in 1972.

What do you mean by a usurper? Throughout history governments have been replaced by revolutions and coups.

And the CCP is no different to any other coup or usurper.

I think you're confusion stems from the failure to distinguish between two separate (but sometimes closely related) concepts; diplomatic recognition of a new government, and continued recognition of a pre-existing state. The borders of a pre-existing state do not automatically change when a new government of the state is diplomatically recognised. Taiwan was recognised as part of the Chinese state under the ROC government prior to 1950-1970, and that did not change when China became the PRC under the newly recognised communist government.

I have no confusion about Taiwan's independent existence. Your continued attempts to justify your position on Taiwan "ownership" is understandable as a Chinese womao.

In my country we have a saying that possession is nine tenths of the law. Legal or not it shows that he who controls something, owns it. China does not like that Japan controls and owns Senkaku's, that Taiwan is controlled and owned by it's inhabitants.

China can make any argument it likes, if Taiwan is attacked it will face harsh consequences including war with many nations of the world. Regardless of what documents may have been signed decades ago, the world today has moved to a position of support for Taiwan and it's continued self determination.

The people of Taiwan are certainly entitled to declare independence from China if that's what they want. But the Chinese people are also entitled to resist this. What is not in dispute is the illegality under international law of arming and supporting separatist movements by foreign states, as the United States appears to be doing in Taiwan.

Again you misread the situation. Taiwan is ruled by the successor to the original legitimate government of China. With China mainland no longer part of the same regime due to a terrorist revolution by the CCP seventy two years ago. It has not changed hands and remains united in its position. China resisted this and lost. Now it wants to restart the war that would no longer be a civil war but an invasion against an independently run state.

The US is continuing to sell arms to the legitimate government ruling Taiwan as it has done since the 1930's. China's objections are irrelevant. If they were selling arms to groups of disaffected citizens on the Chinese mainland it would be a valid point.

If you're not willing to accept that a principle invoked by the International Court of Justice is established international law, I'm not sure what else I can say to convince you.

These "laws" you speak of are not uniformly applied but only when all agree. Simply put not everyone agrees with the CCP position on Taiwan or the law would have been used and passed by the UN against Taiwan. It has not and will not in the future so is not relevant on this issue.

@Peter14

No that is not correct. The war ended in 1949 but recognition in the UN did not come until 1971. It did not come about by realization that the CCP had over run the mainland in 1949. It came about to bring an end to the Vietnam war and for trade opportunities to move manufacturing to cheap labor China.

This timeline makes little sense given that the United States and Australia (your country) both voted against UN resolution 2758 in 1971.

Are you claiming Albania, which sponsored the resolution, and the newly independent African and Middle-eastern states who helped it pass were motivated by cheap manufacturing in China and ending a war in Vietnam which they were not involved in?

Your continued attempts to justify your position on Taiwan "ownership" is understandable as a Chinese womao.

First, I have never used the word ownership to describe the situation. That was you. It's not a useful term in the context of territorial disputes.

Second, if you aren't mature enough to have a serious discussion without throwing around insults, our discussion will end.

And the CCP is no different to any other coup or usurper.

Taiwan is ruled by the successor to the original legitimate government of China. With China mainland no longer part of the same regime due to a terrorist revolution by the CCP

What makes a government legitimate or illegitimate? Also, address my Zaire example please. Explain the difference.

If they were selling arms to groups of disaffected citizens on the Chinese mainland it would be a valid point.

Does the United States recognise Taiwan as the old Republic of China or as a new sovereign state? No.

Does the US recognise the PRC government? Yes.

Do they recognise Taiwan and Mainland China as being part of one China? Yes.

So who exactly are they providing these arms to?

These "laws" you speak of are not uniformly applied but only when all agree. Simply put not everyone agrees with the CCP position on Taiwan or the law would have been used and passed by the UN against Taiwan. It has not and will not in the future so is not relevant on this issue.

These 'laws' I speak of are no longer uniformly applied because countries like the United States have blatantly disregarded them in favour of a world order where those with an unchallenged military advantage act with impunity.

Today you're eager to dismiss international law because it's not on your side as a fan of an independent Taiwan. Tomorrow, you'll be crying foul when the Palestinians get steamrolled by the illegal occupation, but guess what? You won't have a leg to stand on because international law will have been irreparably eroded, thanks in part to you Peter.