OPINION: UNGA Resolution 2758 & One-China Principle

By H.E. Chu Maoming, Chinese Ambassador to Dominica

Recently, the head of relevant department of the Taiwan authorities published an article in media, presumptuously claiming that the United Nations should cease “succumbing to China’s misinterpretation of Resolution 2758” and admit Taiwan into the U.N. to ensure stability in the Taiwan Strait and the Indo-Pacific region.

Not only do such statements misrepresent the facts but also constitute a challenge to the one-China principle, a basic norm of international relations. Behind these, the Taiwan authorities’ deliberate intent to pursue independence is unmistakably clear.

The claim by the Taiwan authorities that the U.N. has “distorted” the one-China principle under the pressure from China disregards both law and fact. Resolution 2758 adopted by the 26th session of the U.N. General Assembly recognizes the representatives of the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the only legitimate representatives of China to the U.N., and to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the U.N. And in all the organizations related to it.

This resolution settled completely the political, legal and procedural issues regarding the representation of the whole of China, including Taiwan, at the U.N.. It was clearly stated in the official legal opinions of the Office of Legal Affairs of the U.N. Secretariat that “the United Nations considers ‘Taiwan’ as a province of China with no separate status,” and the “‘authorities’ in ‘Taipei’ are not considered to ... enjoy any form of government status. In U.N. practice, the island id referred to as “Taiwan, Province of China”, adhering to Resolution 2758 and maintaining the one-China principle. This principle is a widely accepted consensus and a basic norm of international relations, leaving no room for claims of Chinese pressure. It is, in fact, the Taiwan authorities that promote “two Chinas” and openly challenge international justice, revealing their separatist nature.

Moreover, the Taiwan authorities’ claim that U.N. General Assembly Resolution 2758 does not specifically mention “Taiwan,” and thus leaves the question of Taiwan’s legal status unresolved, is utterly unfounded. Historically, Taiwan has always been a part of China’s territory, a fact that is widely recognized internationally and served as an important political premise for the adoption of Resolution 2758. In 1895, Japan forcibly seized Taiwan and Penghu islands from the defeated Qing government following its invasion of China. However, during World War II, a series of documents with international legal effects such as the Cairo Declaration, Potsdam Proclamation, and the instrument of surrender signed by Japan reaffirmed China’s legal and factual recovery of Taiwan.

In 1949, the government of the People’s Republic of China replaced the government of the Republic of China as the sole legal government representing the whole of China. This was a change of government within the framework of China as a subject of international law, without changing China’s sovereignty or inherent territory. The government of the People’s Republic of China naturally has and exercises full sovereignty of China, including sovereignty over Taiwan. Due to the lingering civil war and the intervention of external forces, the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have fallen into a state of protracted political confrontation. Nonetheless, China’s sovereignty and territory have never and will never be split, and Taiwan’s status as part of China’s territory has never and can never change.

Understanding this context makes it clear that the issue is not that U.N. General Assembly Resolution 2758 fails to mention “Taiwan,” but rather that it doesn’t need to. When the General Assembly adopted the resolution, it had already reviewed Taiwan’s status under the U.N. Charter. During the discussions, the majority of countries recognized that Taiwan is part of China, even the “representatives of Chiang Kai-shek” acknowledged Taiwan as Chinese territory. As a result, the resolution was not about admitting new member states but about determining “who represents China.” This did not create a new subject of international law, and the territorial scope of “China” as a subject of international law remained unchanged, with Taiwan continuing to be part of China.

Given this, there was no need to specifically mention Taiwan, a province of China, in the text of the resolution—just as it wasn’t necessary to mention my home province, Anhui. In other words, the absence of a specific reference to Taiwan in the resolution underscores the fact that the government of the People’s Republic of China represents the whole of China, including Taiwan, in the international community.

Twenty years ago, Dominica and China established diplomatic relations based on the one-China principle. The key to the sound development of China-Dominica relations lies in the high level of political mutual trust, as well as mutual understanding and support on issues involving each other’s core interests and major concerns. In March this year, Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit reaffirmed during the meeting with my President Xi Jinping that abides firmly by the one-China principle and opposes any interference in China's internal affairs. China highly appreciates this stance. In the future, China and Dominica will further strengthen cooperation and deepen friendship, ensuring that the development of China-Dominica relations will continue to benefit both nations’ peoples.

Editor's note: The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of Sino-Carib News. Sino-Carib News does not own the rights to this article.

---------------------------------------

(If you want to contribute an opinion, letter, or commentary, please contact us at info@sino-carib.com. Follow @SinoCarib on Facebook, Twitter & LinkedIn to discover the latest commentaries in the Opinion Section.)