International Law: Taiwan and Tibet - Research Paper Example

Are Taiwan and Tibet s under international Law? International law terms the as the primary subject. For a state to be recognized it sets forth number of requirements and conditions. Apart from these requirements, the states are often subject to the global dynamics and circumstances based on political, geographical and diplomatic elements which largely lead to the existence, recognition and non recognition as a whole. While approximately a total of over 193 states are recognized and are in existence under the United Nations umbrella, there are certain nations whose status is relatively unclear and undefined owing to the political and global dynamics. Tibet and Taiwan are among those nations that are taken for a case of investigation and definition with regard to the true existence in modern day rulings of international law. Thesis statement: International law sets specific rules with relevance to the statehood of a given territory. Political statehood and legal statehood are two broader dimensions of international law that often define the standing of various nations. Taiwan and Tibet are two similar cases of political and legal interpretation in the context of international recognition. Each of them cannot be termed as sovereign states owing to the legal, historical, and political interpretations and hurdles that stand in the way of each of these two regions. Objectives: This paper looks into the legal and political scenario pertinent to Taiwan and China. This will be undertaken so through a brief understanding and insight into the history of each of the piece of land. Taiwan and Tibet both are under the direct or indirect influence of China. In last couple of decades, the two countries have expressed their desire with regard to status in the community of nations as sovereign independent nations that may be free from any external influences such as that of China. In the context of international law, Tibet and Taiwan serve as two examples that are relatively unusual and contrast the conventional definition of a state as compared to the other 193 member states of the global community. In case of Tibet, the historic precedence is taken for a key point with regard to the claim of each side. Article 2(4) of United Nations Charter: United Nations has clearly defined the guideline principles towards the sovereignty of a state. It therefore strongly opposes the use of force and coercive means towards the signing of agreement that may change the status of the country. However, a given vassal state or a protectorate has to fulfill number of basic features and requirements that are set forth in order to become a sovereign independent state. Recent events: As recent as 2007, the Taiwan president aimed for bringing about more active role from United Nations and in this regard the Secretary General of United Nations ( Ban Ki Moon) was reminded of the unsettled status and the need for granting Taiwan, a Republic of China part at present an independent status free from Chinese influence. While United Nations still advocates the stance of China based on the historic claims and standing of China. The legal status of Chinese claim: China under the resolution number 2758 enjoys the authority and protection of Taiwan as a Republic of China part along with other regions within the People’s Republic of China (Turton and Benedictus). United States of America in recent times has stressed for the granting Taiwan with a more legal and independent state. Under Article 73 of United Nations Charter, states and regions have the right to build on consolidating their authority, their power and rule with regard to the international activities and they have equal right to self determination. The case of naturalization: Japan and United States of America are two opponents to the Chinese claims of Taiwan being an integral part. One major soft move came about by United States of America when a Taiwan citizen was given with a nationality of Taiwan against the common practice of granting them against the Chinese nationality. This move came about as a part of naturalization under the rules of international law which defines specific modes of nationality and naturalization is one of them. Tibet has had a disputed status as a global entity. At present Tibet serves for a Vassal state. It is under the influence and patronage of China. International law allows space for defining a type of state in the form of vassal state where the state is directly under the protection of the dominant or the suzerain state (Page and Sonnenburg, 584). The latter state enjoys authority over its domestic and external affairs undertaking. The status of vassal state differs from that of being a protectorate. As a vassal state, the state under influence comes under direct instructions with regard to peace, war, agreement or treaty against any other nation. A Vassal state can seek the suzerain’s help with regard to engaging itself in any military offensive against any other state. The history of Tibet stretches to dispute and disagreement over its international status. And it has been under Chinese control directly since 1959 (Nathan and Scobell, 200). Dalai Lama has been the individual who has been seeking a status free of China’s influence and some even claim his role as one leading to that of government in exile (Rozeboom). Taiwan is the second case which seeks full recognition in terms of international law and a sovereign state (Chen, 49). It has remained largely under the influence of Republic of China. Despite its economic dependency on China, Taiwan has aimed for an independent sovereign piece of land that may be as effective and as independent in its decision makings as is China or any other country in the world. Historical account of Taiwan’s independent statehood: Taiwan remained directly under China up till 1971. Towards the 1970s Taiwan was globally recognized as a separate entity aimed for free existence from the influence of China. China on the other hand, has termed Taiwan along with number of other islands to be an integral part of China, as a result it must be within the guardianship and protection of China in case of the foreign affairs and other important matters that define the overall policies of a state. Starting from the day in 1949 when China became an independent state under the United Nations recognition, Taiwan remained its internal part. This remained so for up till 1971. After that a continuous effort and debate has been in place with reference to Taiwan’s legal status as a global entity and a state. The case of Tibet is slightly different and it is largely under the influence and occupation of China. It has all the right to regaining and claiming the right to self determination. There is a dispute in claim by each side, however history reveals that the Tibetan claim with regard to independence. While it is an established fact that China remained dominant and had the upper hand in the rivalry, yet there were number of treaties and agreements that show that Tibet sovereignty was agreed upon as early as 821 A.D. in between the foreign invaders headed to the area that is both China and Tibet in modern day and they were occupied by the Mongols who did not see any difference between the two. From the days of Mongol Empire to other eras of domination Tibet aimed for keeping itself separate and away from the protection of China. For this purpose, towards the start of 20th century in 1912, Tibet formally declared its independence. This remained in effect till 1949 until China had not declared its independence. However it was only after 1949 that China formally annexed Tibet making it a vassal of its own. A forceful annexation: According to the records an agreement exists between the two states in the form of seventeen point agreement. This agreement came about in 1951 and the terms of the agreement included the fact that China was handed over the de facto authority to guard for the Tibet sovereignty while internally Tibet would look after its own affairs. According to Tibet and its inhabitants, the seventeen point agreement came about through coercive means. The paradox: While Taiwan fulfills the requirements of statehood, it remains a de facto existing country on account of the Chinese influence. For this purpose, all those countries that have accepted and recognized Taiwan as a sovereign independent country do not enjoy the diplomatic engagements with China in a complete manner. In the case of Tibet, the Chinese support is based on the claim of pre historic times stretching back to Yuan Dynasty. Further, China has maintained the claim that it was after 1912 when Qing Dynasty that lasted till 1912 led to the potential question of who would administer over Tibet. Initially Tibet remained separate from the Qing dynasty but China; in bid to overcome the vacuum created overtook its custody as a vassal state towards 1949. Tibet in contrast claims that it is sufficiently strong enough to look after its foreign affairs as a result Tibet must remain free from the influence of China and its sovereignty must be respected (Chuluun and Bulag,p .20). Between PRC and ROC: PRC is People’s Republic of China and ROC is Republic of China and each has its significance with regard to the Taiwanese case of international recognition. In the case of ROC Taiwan enjoys global recognition as a sovereign country. Contrast to this, the PRC makes up for part of the unified piece of land that has Taiwan, Penghu under its protection and influence. Further, there is a continuous debate regarding the complete independence of Taiwan all free from the Chinese influence having its own defense and internal structures. It along with number of islands remained part of china and China gave it way to democracy in a step wise process with major shift coming along in 1988. In recent times the Taiwan leadership has stressed for gaining more freedom in the context of international law and becoming a subject of law. At present Taiwan enjoys the status of an independent place within the region of China. By this ruling and this definition Taiwan does not enjoy the status of subject of international law. It therefore does not have the capacity and capability to engage itself in direct global foreign affairs. All its major external decisions are subject to Chinese approval. Similarly, attack on Taiwan, or usage of Taiwanese air space is taken for violation of the sovereignty of China as a whole. China has given it a status of Republic of Taiwan, yet in international intercourse it does not enjoy the same privileges and status owing to the restrictive nature of existence due to Chinese duress (Ong). Taiwan still struggles to find sovereign existence free from any influence of China. United States of America and China has had their rivalry in terms of the political systems and this took over two and a half decades for United States of America to recognize China towards 1971 (Boyer, 486). Owing to this, the Taiwan issue has remained an unsolved one and on one side United states stresses for existence of Taiwan that may be free from the influence of Chinese presence and interference for this purpose United States of America terms the status of Taiwan as an unresolved and disputed one owing to the overall scenario with regard to the People Republic of China and Republic of China case. A pseudo State: The strongest case of Tibet being a sovereign state or making up for the requirements came about in the phase between 1912 to 1949. But experts still claim that the existence of Tibet in that era was a stepping stone towards becoming a recognized entity and as a de facto. For this purpose they had the basics of being a definite population, currency and stamps being separated. Evidence and concluding views: Based on the historic evidences, it can be established that under the present scenario Tibet is a vassal state and under the influence of China. This claim and standing is valid from the current day existence. But this does not include the legitimate and legal standing of the issue. In the legal sphere and according to the charter of United Nations and its articles dealing with the clause of sovereignty, each state has the right to declaring its independence and there should be no treaty that is against the wishes of the people. Dalai Lama is one individual who stands as the proponent of the mindset and idea prevailing in Tibet who strongly opposes the Chinese influence. While it remained a de facto state between 1912 and 1949, after China overtook it and claimed for protecting its foreign affairs (McCorquodale and Orosz,p. 4). Similarly, many Western countries have expressed their concerns with regard to the Chinese influence and Chinese claim about its rights to interference and guarding of Tibet for the external affairs. In such cases when the country is under the influence of another for its external affairs, it is being termed as a vassal state and this is a legal position. A vassal state has to turn into a de facto independent state and later on becoming a fully sovereign state. The Dalai Lama movement and other internal demands that are expressed by Tibet time and again point towards the internal desire of Tibet people which is based on the idea of creating a sovereign state free from any influence of any given country. Conclusion: By the general standards that prevail in the international sphere of politics, both the regions are still distant from the true recognition and existence. It is due to this fact that both the regions have no direct or active representation or participation in the United Nations proceedings. They therefore do not make up for major global treaties or global participation as independent states, rather in each of the case they are under the influence of China. India for example has been a strong advocate with regard to the Tibet issue and wants Tibet and its people given the due rights and recognition as a fully sovereign state where it may enjoy independent existence among the community of nations under the umbrella of United Nations Organization. The case of Taiwan and Tibet should be resolved because each of these has led to the unhealthy precedence on account of relationship between the regional states. For example in case of Tibet, the tiers are not friendly between India and China, similarly, Japan strongly opposes the claim of China over Taiwan and it along with United States of America keeps on reiterating for resolving the issue and granting each of these two regions sovereign recognition free from Chinese influence (Liu,p. 130). References: Boyer, John. The Plaid Avengers World. Kendall Hunt, 2010. Chuluun, Sampildondov and Uradyn E. Bulag. The Thirteenth Dalai Lama on the Run (1904-1906): Archival Documents from Mongolia. BRILL, 2013 Chen, Lung-Chu. An Introduction to Contemporary International Law: A Policy-oriented Perspective. Oxford University Press, 2015 Liu, Guoli. Chinese Foreign Policy in Transition. Transaction Publishers, 2004 Nathan, Andrew J. and Andrew Scobell. Chinas Search for Security. Columbia University Press, 2015 Ong, Russell. Chinas Security Interests in the Post-Cold War Era. Routledge, 2013 Page, Melvin E. and Penny M. Sonnenburg. Colonialism: an international, social, cultural, and political encyclopedia. A-M. Vol. 1, Volume 1. ABC-CLIO, 2003 McCorquodale, Robert and Nicholas Orosz. ibet, the Position in International Law: Report of the Conference of International Lawyers on Issues Relating to Self-Determination and Independence for Tibet. Serindia Publications, Inc, 1994 Turton, Michael and Brian Benedictus. US Policy and International Law: Taiwan’s Friend. 17 July 2014. 26 March 2015 Rozeboom, Annelie. Waiting for the Dalai Lama. Jaico Publishing House, 2011 Read More