‘UGALING KANTO BOY’

SUPALPAL ang Tsina sa hindi inaaashang sagot ni Defense Secretary Gibo Teodoro sa pagbabanta ng Beijing dahil sa kalatas ng pagbati ni BBM sa bagong halal na pangulo ng Taiwan. Ugaling kanto boy ang Tsina. Mahilig lang manindak, ani Gibo.

“It is unfortunate that the People’s Republic of China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman stooped to such low and gutter level talk – resorting to insulting our President and the Filipino nation, and further debasing herself, the Ministry, and Party she represents in the process.” Ito ang tinuran ni Gibo sa kanyang pahayag noong Miyerkoles.

Tinukoy ang spokesman ng Tsina na si Mao Ning na nagbabala kay BBM na huwag “maglaro ng apoy” sa bagong halal na pangulo ng Taiwan na si Lai Ching-te. Sa totoo, kinikilala ng maraming bansa ang Taiwan bilang isang malaya at maunlad na bansa maliban sa Tsina na iginigiit na kanilang lalawigan ang Taiwan.

Hindi kinikilala ng maraming bansa ang “One China” policy. Tanging ang Beijing ang kumikilala sa “One-China” policy tulad ng kanilang pagkilala sa Nine-Dashline na nilikha ng kanilang imahinasyon. Ipinatawag noong Martes ang sugo ng Filipinas sa Tsina na si Jaime Flor Cruz matapos sabihin ni BBM na umaasa siya na makikipagtrabaho kay Lai.

“The Chinese side is strongly dissatisfied and resolutely opposes” ang pahayag ni Marcos, ani Mao. Kasalukuyang pangalawang pangulo ng Taiwan si Lai na mula sa Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) na nagtataguyod ng soberanya at paglaban ng Taiwan sa pananakot, pagbabanta, at pananakop ng Tsina. Hindi natutuwa ang Taiwan sa pag-aangkin ng Tsina sa isla bilang bahagi ng kanilang teritoryo. Nagbabanta ang Tsina kukunin ng sapilitan ang Taiwan sapagkat bahagi ito ng kanilang teritoryo.

Hindi kinilala ng Beijing ang sinuman bansa na may diplomatic relations sa Taipei. Noong Lunes, nagpadala ng mensahe si BBM na bumabati kay Lai sa kanyang tagumpay sa nakalipas na halalan doon. “On behalf of the Filipino people, I congratulate President-elect Lai Ching-te on his election as Taiwan’s next President,” ani BBM.

“We look forward to close collaboration, strengthening mutual interests, fostering peace, and ensuring prosperity for our peoples in the years ahead,” aniya. “I deeply value the enduring friendship between Taiwan and the Philippines. I look forward to enhancing our economic and people-to-people ties while championing democracy, peace, and prosperity in the region,” aniya.

Nagpasalamat si Lai sa pagbati ni BBM. Bago ipadala ang kalatas ni BBM kay Lai, inulit ng DFA ang komitment ng Filipinas sa One China policy na nag sasabing bahagi ng Tsina ang Taiwan. “The Department of Foreign Affairs reaffirms the principles contained in the Joint Communique of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the People’s Republic of China signed by President Ferdinand E. Marcos and Premier Zhou Enlai on 9 June 1975,” ayon sa DFA. “The Philippines is committed to its One China policy,” dagdag ng DFA.

“It is important to note that the Joint Communique of the Philippines and China signed by President Ferdinand E. Marcos and Premier Zhou Enlai on 9 June 1975 also stated that ‘the two Governments agree to settle all disputes by peaceful means… without resorting to the use or threat of force.’”
***
May isinulat si Manuel Laserna, isang tagamasid sa hidwaan sa pagitan ng Filipinas at Tsina.

There is a campaign underway by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to reinterpret UN Resolution 2758 as based on its “One China” Principle and spread the fallacy that, through the resolution, UN member states came to a determination that Taiwan is a part of the PRC. Yet, in passing the resolution in 1971, the countries solely intended to grant the seat occupied by the Republic of China (Taiwan) in the General Assembly and the Security Council to the PRC. This is reflected in the official historic record and meeting minutes as well as in the resolutions raised at the time for the General Assembly’s consideration.

The PRC understood then that the resolution did not contain the Taiwan conclusions it wanted. Prime Minister Zhou Enlai noted that, if Resolution 2758 passed, “the status of Taiwan is not yet decided.” Beijing, through its proxies at the UN, expressed its unwillingness to join the organization if it allowed “‘two Chinas,’ ‘one China, one Taiwan,’ or ‘the status of Taiwan remaining to be determined.’” However, given that Beijing did not enjoy the same level of international influence then as it does today, it did not reject the resolution when it passed. Instead, PRC officials assumed the “China” seat and only later began to leverage their position to promote Beijing’s stance on Taiwan at the UN level.

The PRC’s efforts to rewrite Taiwan’s status at the UN ramped up in the 1990s and early 2000s at the same time as the island’s democratization. The PRC has since worked to “internationalize” its “One China” Principle and to conflate it with UN Resolution 2758, a revisionist shift from the original intent of the document.

Beijing has managed to further institutionalize and normalize its stance on Taiwan within the UN by signing secret agreements with UN bodies, restricting Taiwan’s access to the UN and its facilities, and embedding PRC nationals across various levels of UN staff. The UN and its specialized agencies have not made the texts of these agreements, such as that of the 2005 memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the PRC and the World Health Organization, available to the public or to any entity beyond the main signatories, though leaked guidance memos provide insights into the scope of the MOU’s content.

The PRC has likewise sought to force its views on nomenclature relating to Taiwan within the UN. This includes withholding UN accreditation from NGOs and civil society groups that do not refer to Taiwan as a part of the PRC in their organizational materials or on their websites. Recently, it has come to light that the PRC and its representatives have altered historic UN documents to change references of “Taiwan” to “Taiwan, Province of China.” (Examples are presented in a case study.)

These developments have played out alongside marked shifts in the guidance of the UN Office of Legal Affairs on Taiwan, where it only 15 years ago cited an ambiguous and undefined “One China” policy, but now reiterates the PRC position on Taiwan. The PRC has likewise used UN Resolution 2758 and bilateral normalization agreements with other member states to falsely claim that its “One China” Principle is a universally accepted norm. It has also ensured that a plurality of countries back its views at the UN level and will cast votes alongside it—particularly on issues of Taiwan’s participation—and it reinforces this support through economic pressure on governments.

The PRC’s efforts to constrain Taiwan at the UN have broader implications for international governance, as it shows a prioritization of one member state’s national interests over the global community’s—as exemplified by Taiwan’s damaging exclusion from global health debates during the coronavirus pandemic. The United States opposes the PRC’s attempts to redefine UN Resolution 2758 and has pushed back against UN statements claiming that Taiwan is a province of the PRC, including issuing a 2007 “non-paper” asserting its position that Taiwan’s status is not yet determined. The PRC has recently attempted to use its narrative of the “One China” Principle as embedded in UN Resolution 2758 to call into question the legitimacy of longstanding US policy on Taiwan—including the Taiwan Relations Act, which is US law.”

***
Email:bootsfra@yahoo.com