404: Taiwan Not Found // Chinese Distortion of the UN Resolution 2758
“The UN Resolution 2758 contains 155 words, and “Taiwan” is not among them. Passed in 1971, the document transferred China’s seat at the United Nations from the “representatives of Chiang Kai-shek” to the People’s Republic of China. Yet, it does not address the issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty, nor does it proscribe the island nation’s participation in international organizations. Yet, the resolution has become instrumentalized by the People’s Republic of China. Actively seeks to limit Taiwan’s international space, Beijing distorts the meaning of the resolution and equates it with its unilateral one-China principle. During this webinar, our guest experts will explain the issue of China’s misrepresentation of UN Resolution 2758 in the context of Beijing’s lawfare and propose actionable solutions for countering the Chinese Communist Party’s political warfare.”
This webinar initiates a critical examination of the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) strategic misrepresentation of UN General Assembly Resolution 2758. This resolution, adopted in 1971, served the singular purpose of resolving the question of China’s representation at the United Nations, transferring the seat from the Republic of China (ROC) to the PRC. It is imperative to understand that this document, comprising only 155 words, contains no mention of Taiwan, nor does it legally determine Taiwan’s sovereign status or prescribe its exclusion from international organizations. Historically, even China’s then-Prime Minister Zhou Enlai acknowledged that the “status of Taiwan is not yet decided” following the resolution’s passage. Despite this, Beijing has systematically instrumentalized Resolution 2758, equating it with its unilateral “One China Principle” to justify Taiwan’s exclusion from global forums and to curtail its international diplomatic space.
-
- ★ This strategy is a cornerstone of Beijing’s broader campaign to isolate Taiwan, thereby increasing its vulnerability to coercion and intimidation.
A critical long-term objective of this distortion is to internalize the Taiwan question, allowing Beijing to frame any future international intervention in a cross-Strait conflict as an illegal interference in its domestic affairs, thus preempting international support for Taiwan.
The discussion then pivots to the proactive counter-strategies, emphasizing the vital role of parliamentary advocacy. Organizations like the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) have been instrumental in challenging China’s misinterpretation of Resolution 2758. Parliaments, distinct from executive governments, possess the autonomy to act as powerful and legitimate platforms for public scrutiny, legislative pressure, and cross-party cooperation. Their actions, such as passing motions, effectively generate media attention and elevate awareness among both the public and lawmakers regarding the true, limited scope of Resolution 2758.
-
- ★ This parliamentary diplomacy is a crucial mechanism to prevent Beijing from gaining uncontested control of the narrative, particularly in the context of China’s “emerging economy strategy,” where it leverages economic influence to pressure smaller nations into adopting its maximalist interpretation of the resolution.
The conversation continues with China’s extensive “lawfare” and “normfare” strategies.
- “Lawfare” is defined as the use or misuse of legal frameworks as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve strategic objectives.
- This includes China’s domestic Anti-Secession Law, enacted in 2005, which outlines conditions under which the PRC may employ “non-peaceful means” against Taiwan. More recently, judicial interpretations of the PRC’s Criminal Law, specifically Article 103 concerning anti-separatism, have been utilized to impose severe penalties, including the death penalty, on individuals who advocate for Taiwan’s international participation. This creates a profound chilling effect on free expression and advocacy.
- “Normfare” involves Beijing’s efforts to reshape international norms, for example, by deprioritizing civil and political rights in global discourse in favor of economic rights.
- Taiwan’s complex legal status as a “contested state”—an entity that demonstrably meets all criteria for statehood (population, territory, effective government, capacity to enter into relations with other states) but lacks universal diplomatic recognition—is thoroughly analyzed. Despite this ambiguity, the fundamental non-use of force principle under international law, derived from the UN Charter, should unequivocally protect Taiwan.
- The historical context of the San Francisco Peace Treaty is also highlighted, noting that it did not transfer Taiwan’s sovereign title to any Chinese state after World War II, further supporting the argument that Taiwan’s status is undetermined by that treaty.
The tangible impact of China’s distortion is starkly evident in Taiwan’s repeated exclusion from critical international bodies like the World Health Assembly, underscoring the necessity of Taiwan’s meaningful participation for the rights and well-being of its 23 million people and for effective global governance. The evolving self-identification of the Taiwanese people, who overwhelmingly express a desire for the status quo, and the intricate internal political dynamics within Taiwan’s legislature further complicate and shape its international standing and advocacy efforts. The ambiguities in international law regarding actions like a blockade of Taiwan are also noted as areas Beijing exploits.
Table of Laws, Resolutions, and Principles Discussed
| Law/Resolution/Principle | Significance |
|---|---|
| UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 (1971) | This resolution recognized the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legitimate representative of China at the United Nations. Its primary purpose was to resolve the question of China’s representation, determining which government should occupy the “China seat.” It did not address Taiwan’s sovereignty, its legal status, or its right to participate in international organizations. Beijing malignly distorts this resolution to justify Taiwan’s international isolation. |
| China’s Anti-Secession Law (2005) | A domestic law enacted by the PRC that provides a legal framework for the use of “non-peaceful means” (military force) against Taiwan under specific conditions, such as a formal declaration of independence by Taiwan or the indefinite impossibility of peaceful reunification. It is a key component of China’s “lawfare” strategy to assert its claims over Taiwan. |
| PRC’s Judicial Interpretation of Criminal Law (specifically Article 103 on anti-separatism) | This interpretation clarifies and expands the scope of China’s criminal law regarding “separatist” activities. It explicitly includes actions like advocating for Taiwan’s participation in international organizations as potentially prosecutable offenses, carrying severe penalties, including the death penalty. This creates a chilling effect on individuals, both within and outside Taiwan, who support Taiwan’s international space. |
| San Francisco Peace Treaty (1951) | This treaty formally ended World War II with Japan. According to the discussion, Taiwan’s sovereign title was not transferred to the Chinese state (neither the ROC nor the PRC) by this treaty. This legal ambiguity is central to arguments that Taiwan’s status remains undetermined and that the PRC does not inherently “own” Taiwan based on post-WWII legal arrangements. |
| Non-Use of Force Principle (International Law) | A fundamental principle enshrined in the UN Charter and customary international law, prohibiting states from using or threatening force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other state. The discussion emphasizes that this principle should apply to protect even “contested states” like Taiwan, regardless of their universal recognition, from external aggression, such as a blockade or invasion. |
| UN Charter | The foundational treaty of the United Nations, establishing its purposes, principles, and organizational structure. It is the source of fundamental principles of international law, including the non-use of force principle. |
| United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea | A body of international law governing the rights and duties of states in maritime environments. The discussion references these laws in the context of freedom of navigation and transits through international straits like the Taiwan Strait, which are crucial for international commerce and military movements. |
| One China Principle (PRC’s unilateral claim) | This is Beijing’s political assertion that there is only one China, and Taiwan is an inalienable part of it, governed by the PRC. Beijing actively seeks to impose this principle internationally and equates it with UN Resolution 2758, despite the resolution’s narrower scope. |
| One China Policy (Many countries’ diplomatic stance) | This refers to the diplomatic stance adopted by many countries, including the United States, which acknowledges (but does not necessarily endorse or recognize) the PRC’s position that Taiwan is part of China. This policy is distinct from Beijing’s “One China Principle” and often allows for unofficial relations with Taiwan. |
