Here is one suggestion for getting the Republic of China back into the UN. The Republic of China should return all the money it misapropriated from the United Nations Humanitarian Relief when it was a real nation. The exact figures are not widely known but it is estimated that a vast amount of the KMT
That sounds like a pretty ridiculous way to get in Boomer. That is a lose-lose proposition on all fronts. Admitting that billions of dollars were misappropriated and then give it back to the UN? That would smack of dollar diplomacy on a massive scale.
Unfortunately, I’ve no good alternative suggestion except to bite the bullet and apply as Taiwan, not ROC.
FYI, Taiwan did get a little good press on this latest attempt.
[quote=“Boston Globe”]Taiwan deserves a UN seat
By Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe
AS THE 58TH session of the United Nations General Assembly opened this week, the gavel was wielded by its new president, Julian Hunte of Saint Lucia. When Hunte was elected to the post in June, the UN issued a statement hailing the fact that the presidency was being assumed “by a representative of the smallest country ever to hold that office.” This, it remarked, was proof of the UN’s “faith in the equal right of nations large and small, as enunciated in the [UN] Charter.”
Nations don’t come much smaller or less influential than Saint Lucia. It is a minor Caribbean island known primarily for bananas and tourism. With a population of 158,000, it is less than half the size of Cincinnati. Its $700 million economy ranks in the lowest quintile of GDPs – No. 193 on one standard list of countries around the world.
But however insignificant Saint Lucia might be on the world stage, in the General Assembly it is the equal of every other country. Universality is one of the UN’s core principles; the charter makes membership available to “all . . . peace-loving states.” Within the General Assembly, all states – continental superpower and Caribbean flyspeck alike – have an equal vote.
To be sure, that principle has some severe drawbacks. The worst is that it makes no distinction between tyrannies and democracies. On the other hand, it reflects the universality of many of the world’s scourges. Terrorism, SARS, and drug abuse cross borders and ignore boundaries. As Hunte put it upon being elected, the UN system recognizes that no nation is an island unto itself.
Of all the nations in the world, only one – Taiwan – is excluded from the United Nations. It has not even been allowed to participate in General Assembly sessions as a nonvoting observer, a courtesy extended to entities ranging from the Holy See to the Order of Malta to the International Committee of the Red Cross. This week, for the 11th year in a row, Taiwan is asking to be admitted to the UN. This week, for the 11th year in a row, it will be turned down.
And why? Is Taiwan guilty of some international crime? Is it a dictatorship? Does it make war on its neighbors, practice apartheid, or harbor terrorists?
No: Taiwan is blackballed from the UN because its neighbor is a bully. The Communist government in Beijing insists that Taiwan is merely a renegade Chinese province, not a country in its own right and therefore not entitled to a seat in the UN. That is a ludicrous stance to take in 2003, after more than half a century of Taiwanese self-rule. It is akin to maintaining that North Korea is merely a rebellious region of the Republic of Korea or that Slovenia is nothing but a refractory district of Yugoslavia. However reasonable such arguments might once have been, today they would be specious.
But China devotes considerable economic and diplomatic muscle to enforcing its specious position. It throws tantrums and threatens reprisals whenever Taiwans is treated with the respect due an independent nation. Sadly, most of the world’s governments find it easier to go along with Beijing’s blackball than to defend Taiwan’s right to a UN seat of its own.
Once upon a time, Beijing and Taipei each claimed to be the legitimate government of both mainland China and Taiwan, and each claimed it was entitled to the UN’s China seat. That dispute was settled in 1971, when the General Assembly voted to recognize Beijing as “the sole legitimate government representing China in the United Nations.” That closed the question of who should represent China. But it left open a different question: Who represents the people of Taiwan? For 32 years, the answer has been: nobody.
Beijing’s energetic spin to the contrary notwithstanding, Taiwan has never been ruled by the People’s Republic of China. From the founding of the PRC to the present, Taiwan has had its own government, maintained its own diplomatic profile in the world, and seen to its own defense. There is no justification for treating it as anything less than what it is – a nation unto itself.
In recent decades, Taiwan has transformed itself from an authoritarian one-party state into a vibrant parliamentary democracy. Unlike its thuggish neighbor, Taiwan has become a land of liberty and human rights, a trustworthy US ally, and a responsible member of the community of nations. Its $400 billion economy is one of the world’s most dynamic – No. 23 on the same list that ranks Saint Lucia 193d. Its population of 22.6 million is larger than three-fourths of the UN membership. If minuscule Saint Lucia is entitled to a voice in the General Assembly, surely Taiwan is too.
Fifteen nations signed the petition seeking Taiwan’s admission to the UN, but the United States was not among them. This reluctance to stand up for a beleaguered democratic friend does us no honor. The barring of Taiwan is a clear wrong. Americans should be the first to say so.
Jeff Jacoby’s e-mail address is firstname.lastname@example.org.
Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company[/quote]
Well, being a newbie here, i don’t know much about history here, but it seems that Taiwan is to blame for its situation now at the UN. When China was admitted, Chiang Kai the Sheik adamantly said that the ROC would not join the UN, would quit the world body, if CHINA was allowed in. China went in, and the ROC went out on its own volition. THe head man said it’s either us or no one. So China went in, and ROC went out, but the ROC headman made this decision. Correct me if I am wrong! If so, then Taiwan can’t go around crying now to get back in after it asked to get out. CHECKMATE. No sense crying over spilt milk…
Where is this place ? It sounds too good to be true !
That guy who wrote the article in the B Glove is a right wing conservative who supports anything that is anti commie. He probably never even been here. What does he know?
But I must say, as a first time visitor to this fair isle, not a bad place. so far so good. I plan to stay for a year, and if all goes well, with the ad biz, build a small empire. Being 25 years old, I am ready to charge ahead into battle.
You are wrong.
That’s an enduring myth. In fact, once it became a reality that the PRC was going to get admitted to the UN, the ROC was holding out for dual representation - that is one UN seat for the PRc and one for the ROC. It had the support of the US and others for this. However, part of their agreement with the US was that for domestic purposes they would still trupet the line that their could only be one ‘China’ seat in the UN. Unfortunately in the first vote on this issue, Taiwan was defeated and out they went, without even the chance of dual representation (in an extremely close vote with some very strange goings on including the PRC Shanghaiing UN delegates allied to Taiwan).
So no they didn’t jump, they were pushed.
[quote=“winter”]That guy who wrote the article in the B Glove is a right wing conservative who supports anything that is anti commie. He probably never even been here. What does he know?
But I must say, as a first time visitor to this fair isle, not a bad place. so far so good. I plan to stay for a year, and if all goes well, with the ad biz, build a small empire. Being 25 years old, I am ready to charge ahead into battle.[/quote]
No doubt you’ll be in hog heaven if the PRC takes over.
If for no other reason than blatant self-interest, you ought to support Taiwan’s existence as its own nation.
That’s right. Why give the money back? They should use it, along with a significant chunk of their foreign reserves, and buy the UN.
[quote]That’s right. Why give the money back? They should use it, along with a significant chunk of their foreign reserves, and buy the UN.
A little over the top but I think you got the idea. Dollar diplomacy is the only diplomacy that the ROC has ever used effectively. From the Taiwan relations act to the few allies the Republic of China has they were all bought dollar for dollar and still are. This is dollar diplomacy concealed in good intentions.
The trend toward reconciling past misdoings has already started. The government is pushing to seize illicit funds obtained through graft and abuse by the KMT. The problem is that it looks to many, myself included like one hand taking from the other. The DPP will simply become the KMT and nothing will change.
The UN has already set the precedent for this kind of diplomacy with the oil for food program set up under the previous sanctions on Iraq. Those sanctions are gone and all those out of work dignitaries are stealing the UN china. Right now the UN is full of third world diplomats for sale cheap.
China has no veto in the general council and that is where new members are inducted. If Taiwan were to up the ante there, it may even push the PRC back to negotiation table.
The general council is only advisory. It’s the security council that actually has any power. And that’s where China got their veto power.
The only reason why Taiwan would want to join the UN is to get international recognition for its independence of China. Applying as ‘Taiwan’ instead of ‘ROC’ is a good move to make the world understand that Taiwan has matured and do not see itself as the seat of all of China anymore. I read not long ago that Dalai Lama did not consider working together with ROC, because ROC consider Tibet to be their territory as well. Same evil - different face.
Did anyone else march for the name change on the 6th Sep?
The security council has no say in allowing or disallowing new member states. Only the general assembly has jurisdiction in such matters. Now getting the vote onto the floor is another matter but with enough money anything is possible.
Not that I’m against it, but what exactly are the benefits of joining the UN, other than getting one of your bureaucrats to sit in NY on his/her a$$?!
ROC got voted out of the UN? ROC quit the UN. can you be expelled from school if you dropped out first?
awhile back the taipei times ran a pertinent bit at taipeitimes.com/chnews/1999/09/1 … 0000002911
the ROC quit . the vote went ahead anyway. that it was an illegal vote has never been disputed. the ROC wasn’t there to defend her interests. have any other nations ever been kicked out of the UN? no.
having lived on both sides of the straight, generally mainland chinese “know” ROC had a hissy and ran away from the UN just as it did from china proper. while on this side the taiwanese “know” big, bad, bully china had them booted(with little mention of 1945-71. who created the “one china” policy if not the KMT?).
perhaps taiwan’s best bet would to be to show up at the next general assembly opening with the knowledge that their ouster was non-binding because it wasn’t legal. have a check ready for all past dues and wait to see what happens.
Your TT article link doesn’t work.
Here’s a copy of the UN resolution.
It writes clearly that UN expelled CKS. But it doesn’t mention representation of Taiwan. Sad.
Oh! I didn’t know that! I actually see some hope for this membership now.
WarMonkey, I too would like to know the benefits of Taiwan being in the U.N.
What have the benefits been of Taiwan joining the WTO? Let’s see…so far all I can come up with are higher prices (no higher salaries).
[quote=“Vannyel”]WarMonkey, I too would like to know the benefits of Taiwan being in the U.N. [/quote]I know! They can send their troops around the world to participate in ‘peace-keeping’ missions like these two good-hearted Europeans (Belgians) in Somalia:
That’s what the UN is good for. :x
I seriously hope GWB isn’t stupid enough to let the UN in Iraq.
They must have been REALLY hungry.
Where did you get this photo? Never heard of this incidence.
It’s pretty famous. Supposedly the black guy was caught in some petty thievery from the UN troops, so they toasted him lightly over the fire to teach him a lesson.
One wonders what the little kids in Kosovo did to deserve being sexually abused by UN peacekeepers. Must have been a common offense, since there are so many allegations of it.
Or maybe the poor Somalian was cold, and they helped to warm him.
The worst I’ve heard was about the Swedish UN peacekeepers in Bosnia that collected underwear labels of prostitutes they had slept with. Pretty innocent compared to the above.
Anyway, it shouldn’t be difficult to find worse offences by US soldiers from the last couple of wars they have been involved in, or the many places they are stationed in the world. I believe the arguments for replacing US troops with UN peacekeepers is mainly based on the need for international recognition. Atrocities is a different matter.
While Taiwan wasn’t exactly voted out of the UN, it did loose a crucial vote in 1971 which left it as a foregone conclusion that they would be voted out. They then quit. This vote was the procedural vote to make the question of Taiwan’s representation an important question requiring a 2/3 majority.
Look at the article Cranky posted here for more details.
There is another article somewhere which details why the myth that the ROC only wanted themselves as the ‘sole representative of China’ and wouldn’t accept dual representation. I’ll try to find it.