Mr. Clinton's visit to China, and his pronouncements in Beijing and Shanghai regarding Taiwan, prompted us to write the following tongue-in-cheek report.
London, 12 July 1998. The president of the Republic of Footsiana, Mr. Llib Notnilc, today visited London, met with the British Queen, and pronounced that it was the policy of Footsiana that the American colonies should be peacefully reunified with Great Britain. He emphasized the common English language, Anglo-Saxon race and common culture existing across the Atlantic, and said that the future of America should be determined by the British on both sides of the Atlantic.
Mr. Notnilc also expressed himself in favor of a "three no" policy: 1) no "One Britain, One America", 2) no support for American independence, and 3) no support for American membership in the United Nations and other organizations that require nationhood.
He suggested that the present entity in North America, the so-called United States of Britain in America (USBA), should adopt a declaration of non-independence, which should read along the following lines:
In Washington, the USBA (United States of Britain in America) president, Mr. Lee Tim Way standing with his back against the wall expressed satisfaction that President Notnilc's words had not damaged his nation's interests, particularly in view of the fact that the USBA was to be considered a non-nation. He also said he was confident that the Republic of Footsiana would stand by its allies, and would not play footsies with its allies, but would stand up for them (more or less), and help defend America in case the British Empire would launch missiles 32 miles off the coast of New York, or would invade Washington again, and burn the White House.
After President Notnilc's return to Footsiana, his Secretary of State, Mrs. Alldark, reiterated that in spite of the 180-degree turn in London, Footsiana's policies had not changed and that, in any case, the principles of democracy and self-determination did not apply to the United States, since under the "One Britain" policy of Footsiana the United States could not be considered a nation, and should be classified as a non-nation. She said she hoped this would clarify the situation.
Taiwan-into-the-UN paddle wheeler on the Hudson River
During the past few years, the months of September and October have become the highlight for the annual "Taiwan into the UN" campaign. In mid-July 1998, a number of African and Latin American nations again submitted a proposal, urging that Taiwan be admitted to the United Nations. Eleven countries wrote UN Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, proposing that the status of Taiwan be placed on the agenda of the next General Assembly session, which gets under way in September.
As it has done in the past, Nicaragua is spearheading the effort to bring the issue before the assembly. Joining in this year were Burkina Faso, El Salvador, Gambia, Grenada, Liberia, Sao Tome and Principe, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Swaziland and Solomon Islands.
Taiwan Communiqué comment: we emphasize that the request is done to gain a seat for the so-called "Republic of China on Taiwan", as the KMT authorities still refer to themselves. This is a dead-end street.
The Kuomintang authorities lost their "Republic of China" seat in the United Nations in 1971 when the organization accepted the Communist government in Beijing as the sole representative of China. Resolution 2758 dealt with the question who was representing China in the United Nations. It did not deal with the question of Taiwan's representation, which is a separate issue, to be dealt with as a follow up on the decisions of the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951-52 (see below).
Some international observers argue that we should not raise the Taiwan issue, saying that Taiwan's entry into the UN is impossible because China has a permanent seat in the Security Council and will block any attempt to let Taiwan join the UN.
We believe that such a position is indefensible and totally wrong: the world should not let itself be dictated by a repressive and dictatorial China. It should stand up for the principles on which the UN was founded: freedom, democracy, equal rights and self-determination of peoples.
In particular Western nations, which seem so eager to trade with China, have the moral obligation to make it clear to China that its acceptance as a full partner in the international community hinges on its recognition of Taiwan as a friendly neighbor.
Right now, a world body which was set up on the basis of the principle of universality is still excluding a free, democratic and independent nation of 21 million people. This needs to change.
The establishment of the United Nations in 1945 started a new era and long series of declarations of independence in Asia and Africa. Because of a fluke accident of history the occupation of Taiwan by Chiang Kai-shek's armies fleeing from China the Taiwanese people were not able to join the international family of nations as an independent nation right away.
Why is it important that this de-facto independent country becomes a member of the UN? First, because of the original principles of the UN itself: the world body was founded on the principles of universality and self-determination. If the UN is to survive as an institution that safeguards world peace, it is essential that it adheres to these principles, and apply them to the case of Taiwan.
A second reason for supporting Taiwan's membership in the UN is that this further emphasizes that Taiwan's future is an international issue, to be dealt with by the international community, and not an "internal problem" for the "Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Straits" to decide on. The responsibility of the international community stems from the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1952, which decided that Japan ceded its sovereignty over Taiwan, but did not specify a recipient for sovereignty over Taiwan.
In the final declaration at San Francisco, it was stated that the future status of Taiwan was to be decided in due time "...in accord with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations." Certainly in those days, this term could have only one meaning: "independence."
A third reason for supporting Taiwan's entry into the UN is that over the past decade Taiwan has due to the hard work of the democratic opposition and the overseas Taiwanese community achieved a democratic political system. This argument is especially relevant for the United States and Europe. It would be indefensible, for the West to deny UN membership to a free and democratic nation, while condoning the presence of repressive, undemocratic nations such as China, Iraq, Iran, etc. This would be a flagrant violation of basic democratic principles.
It needs to be emphasized time and again that Taiwan fulfills all basic requirements of a nation-state: it has a defined territory, a population of 21.7 million (greater than that of three quarters of the UN member nations), and a government which exercises effective control over the territory and the population.
We thus appeal to the rest of the world, and particularly the United States and Europe, to live up to the principles of universality and democracy on which the United Nations were founded, accept Taiwan as a full and equal partner, and recognize it under the heading of a new "One Taiwan, One China" policy.
A new "One Taiwan, One China" policy would not alter international recognition of the government in Beijing as the rulers of mainland China, but would take account of the reality that there is a new Taiwan, in which the large majority of the people consider themselves Taiwanese, and have no desire whatsoever to "unify" with Communist China.
It is in China's own interest to accept Taiwan as a friendly neighbor, end hostilities towards the island, and move towards peaceful coexistence, instead of perpetuating an old and anachronistic Civil War. The Taiwanese themselves didn't have anything to do with that Civil War and their future should not be held hostage to it.
Back to: Table of Contents
Copyright © 1998 Taiwan Communiqué