MALAYBALAY CITY (MindaNews / 20 February) – On August 10, 2022, Xinhua, China’s official state news agency, reported that the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council and the State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China published on the same date a white paper titled “The Taiwan Question and China’s Reunification in the New Era.”
The white paper reiterates the position of the Communist Party of China (CPC) that Taiwan is part of China, and that it is determined to “achieve peaceful reunification” but reserving “the option of taking all necessary measures, including ‘the use of force’ to be taken “under compelling circumstances.”
In the same document, China claims that the one-China principle “represents the universal consensus of the international community; it is consistent with the basic norms of international relations.”
A statement explaining China’s position on Taiwan that was posted five days later on the website of the China Mission to the European Union reads in part:
“The one-China principle is the universal consensus of the international community. To date, 181 countries including most European countries, have established diplomatic relations with China on the basis of the one-China principle. Recently, more than 170 countries have openly reaffirmed their commitment to the one-China principle, and the UN Secretary-General has stated that the UN will continue to adhere to General Assembly Resolution 2758. These positions have once again proved and strengthened the consensus of the one-China principle among the international community.”
What are the current positions of countries around the world on China’s claim of sovereignty over Taiwan? Is it true that the one-China principle, which is substantially different from the one-China policy, has become the “universal consensus of the international community” as Beijing claims?
Beijing’s diplomatic push
The Australian think-tank Lowy Institute published last month the findings of its study about the UN member states’ position on Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China, and what the one-China policy means for them. It noted that there have been major shifts after China embarked on a diplomatic push to convince UN member states to adopt a pro-Beijing stand with regard to the status of the self-governed island.
The findings list five categories of positions on Taiwan and the PRC – Team Taipei, Status Quo-ists, Mixed Signalers, Beijing Leaners and Beijing Backers – whose stances are defined as follows:
Team Beijing “retain state-to-state ties with the government in Taipei and thereby do not recognize the PRC or endorse its sovereignty over Taiwan.” A more straightforward way of saying it is that these countries recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state separate from China. These are 11 small states, mostly in the Caribbean and the Pacific.
Status Quo-ists are the 40 states that “recognize the government in Beijing, but do not endorse the PRC’s one-China principle and instead maintain one-China policies. These countries “take note of”, “acknowledge”, or “respect” Beijing’s claim that Taiwan is part of China, but stop short of explicitly endorsing this PRC position.” They include the US, Japan, the Philippines and Australia and countries in Europe and East Asia that, although comprising the not numerically largest category, “are arguably still the most powerful global grouping” as they “account for more than 50 per cent of global GDP and total world military spending.”
Mixed Signalers include 23 states that recognize the PRC as part of one-China policies and decline to endorse Beijing’s one-China principle. But unlike the Status Quo-ists, the Mixed Signalers affirm China’s sovereignty over Taiwan.
The 119 countries categorized as Beijing Leaners and Beijing Backers “support to varying degrees the PRC position on Taiwan. The Beijing Leaners in category four endorse the one-China principle and affirm China’s sovereignty over Taiwan. As well as taking these two positions, the Beijing Backers in category five support PRC efforts to ‘achieve national reunification’ without specifying that these efforts should be peaceful, arguably consenting to the PRC using force to take control of Taiwan.”
Except for Eswatini, all African states are Beijing Leaners and Backers. Lowy Institute said states in Latin America, Europe, Asia, and the Pacific are also in these categories, and, like the African countries, “tend to have developing economies.”
Debunking Beijing’s claim in the white paper earlier mentioned that “181 countries including most European countries, have established diplomatic relations with China on the basis of the one-China principle,” the Lowy Institute cited that the 23 Mixed Signalers in category three, along with the 40 Status Quo-ists, decline to endorse the one-China principle.
Regardless, the above data doesn’t paint a rosy picture for Taiwan. Aside from the 119 countries endorsing its one-China principle and sovereignty over Taiwan, Beijing has been getting increasing support for its position on Taiwan in recent joint communiques between the PRC and its diplomatic partners, according to the Lowy Institute. It said their endorsement of China’s “national reunification” efforts might be invoked as a green light to use force to end Taiwan’s de facto independence, although it remains to be seen how these countries would respond in the event of an invasion.
China’s diplomatic offensive suggests that it is trying to avoid the situation Russia faced after invading Ukraine, according to Ja Ian Chiong of the University of Singapore. He said that aside from wanting to “appear legitimate,” China would prefer to avoid diplomatic isolation and to ensure steady supply of oil and other resources from friendly countries in a conflict over Taiwan.
The number of developing countries endorsing Beijing’s position would be crucial in how the UN would act in case of an invasion of Taiwan – in which the member states would have to judge the legitimacy of China’s action or any American-led intervention, Chiong added.
For its part, the Lowy Institute said PRC’s diplomatic strategy of winning over most countries to its position on Taiwan might be meant to minimize resistance to an attack across the Strait. At the same time, it noted that a diplomatic victory “might make military conflict less likely by giving Beijing more confidence in its ability to achieve its goal of control over Taiwan via non-violent means.
Security experts, however, still point to the likelihood of a conflict, saying the only question that remains is when.
(MindaViews is the opinion section of MindaNews. H. Marcos C. Mordeno can be reached at boymords@mindanews.com.)