Direct translation
Warning to the CCP: "If you hit me, I will declare independence"
- Legal scholar advocates using the warning "If you hit me, I will declare independence" to deter Beijing from using force
Editor : Fang Xun / Source : Voice of America / https://www.aboluowang.com/2024/0818/2092260.html8/2092260.html / Image : Activists supporting Taiwan independence confront police officers during an event in Taipei to mark the 70th anniversary of the 228 Incident. (28 February 2017)
Washington—
Since the new DPP government came to power, the Chinese government has stepped up a series of pressure actions on Taiwan. Some views in Taiwan believe that the DPP government's response is too conservative. Faced with the possibility that the Chinese Communist Party may take military action against Taiwan in the future, some legal scholars have proposed that Taiwan and its allies, including the United States, should take the initiative and jointly lead the discourse of Taiwan independence as a lever to warn Beijing that once an armed attack is launched against Taiwan, Taiwan will formally declare independence, so that Beijing will understand that its military action will lead to the consequence of losing Taiwan forever.
U.S. Indo-Pacific Commander: Peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait is extremely important
Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, said at a forum in Honolulu, Hawaii on Thursday (August 15) that due to the close connection between the world economy, it is extremely important for the United States to maintain peace in the Taiwan Strait and prevent the Chinese Communist Party from taking over Taiwan militarily.
According to the Stars and Stripes website, Paparo said in a speech at the Indo-Pacific Irregular Warfare Seminar held by the Global Special Operations Forces Foundation that the interconnectedness of the world economy and its chain reaction are extremely important to everyone, "which is why the Taiwan issue and peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait are very important to all of us."
The report mentioned that Paparo made the above statement in response to the question on the spot: "Why should we pay attention to Taiwan" after making a brief opening speech. He cited the Russian-Ukrainian war and the situation in the Middle East as examples to emphasize that the principle of not resolving disputes by force is very important to all countries. He believes that Taiwan's future must also be resolved in accordance with the "principle of self-determination and peaceful negotiations."
On the same day, in an online discussion on the situation in the Taiwan Strait at the Global Taiwan Institute (GTI), a Washington think tank, Taiwan legal scholar Xu Kaijie, who is currently a visiting scholar at the think tank, analyzed from a legal perspective the response options that Taiwan should take in international law when facing three scenarios - these three scenarios are: the Chinese Communist Party invades Taiwan by force, blocks or isolates Taiwan, and puts pressure on Taiwan in a gray area.
Taiwan should seek to use the law to stop the CCP's invasion
Xu Kaijie believes that the CCP is constantly intensifying its legal war against Taiwan, and Taiwan and its allies must also be prepared and attach importance to the importance of legal warfare, including that the Taiwanese government must avoid making mistakes in the process of the CCP's gray area probing, "letting the CCP find a suitable excuse to start a war."
Xu Kaijie, who is currently a judge in Taiwan's local court, said that since Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations, once the CCP invades Taiwan by force, whether Taiwan or the United States can invoke Article 51 of the UN Charter regarding the "right of individual or collective self-defense" will be the core issue. Taiwan should seek assistance from more potential allies with the support of international law.
Article 51 of the UN Charter states: "In the event of an armed attack against a Member of the United Nations, the right of individual or collective self-defense may be exercised. States must immediately report any measures taken by the Security Council and cease their implementation when the Council itself has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace."
Using Taiwan independence as a lever to deter the Chinese Communist Party from attacking Taiwan
Xu Kaijie, who is also a visiting scholar at the New York University Law School, believes that Taiwan and the United States can jointly try to lead a discourse, that is, "If the Chinese Communist Party attacks Taiwan, Taiwan will be independent", as a lever to deter the Chinese Communist Party from attacking Taiwan on the grounds of Taiwan independence. "Making the Chinese Communist Party afraid of attacking Taiwan is not only a military calculation, but also a risk of losing Taiwan forever under international law."
He said that under the premise that "the war has already begun", "Taiwan's declaration of a new international legal personality still has the opportunity to obtain more diplomatic recognition from other countries in international law by extending an olive branch." Even if no one is willing to recognize Taiwan, the war that everyone is most worried about has already happened, and Taiwan "has nothing to lose."
Xu Kaijie further explained his thoughts in an interview with Voice of America (VOA).
"The CCP often says, if you become independent, I will attack you." For Xu Kaijie, this proposition is: if Taiwan becomes independent, the CCP will attack Taiwan. But he said, what is independence? Beijing's definition is not clear. As long as the CCP casually labels Taiwan as independent, it can attack Taiwan. "So there is a way to prove it the other way around: if you attack me, I will declare independence. If the CCP says it is against Taiwan independence, then it dare not attack, because if it attacks, Taiwan will declare independence."
Let the CCP face the risk of losing Taiwan forever
At a time when Washington is trying to cool down the situation in the Taiwan Strait through diplomatic communication with Beijing, VOA asked Xu Kaijie whether this initiative that declares Taiwan's independence and is regarded as "provocative" can be accepted by the United States or Taiwanese society?
Xu Kaijie said that polls show that most Taiwanese people want to maintain the status quo, that is, not to advocate Taiwan independence, and the ultimate goal of the United States is also to hope that there will be no war in the Taiwan Strait. Therefore, Taiwan draws a red line against the CCP's armed attack, and also to let the United States know that there are tools and methods to prevent war in the Taiwan Strait.
"Since Xi Jinping said in last year's 'Xi-Biden meeting' that the CCP has no plan to attack Taiwan by force, then we can say the opposite, Taiwan has no plan to declare Taiwan independence," said Xu Kaijie. This argument can play a deterrent role against the CCP because if the CCP attacks Taiwan first, it will not only suffer losses in terms of military strength, "if it fails to take it, the CCP will lose Taiwan forever; but if it can maintain the status quo, at least the CCP still has a vague space to operate."
Must consider the legal issues of the CCP's armed invasion of Taiwan
Eyck Freymann, a researcher at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, also believes that the United States must consider the legal issues that may be involved in the CCP's armed invasion of Taiwan, because first, it can play a deterrent role.
"What Beijing must be afraid of is that if it takes military action against Taiwan and loses, it will not only suffer military failure, but it will also forever lose the possibility of achieving peaceful reunification through legal means. I think that is very important. It shows Xi Jinping or any future CCP leader that the CCP has only one chance, and as long as it takes military action, it will permanently eliminate the possibility of taking the path of peace," Freymann said in an online discussion at the Global Taiwan Research Center.
Secondly, Freeman said that the United States must also think about the fact that if Washington invokes the right of collective self-defense in the UN Charter to mobilize its allies to defend Taiwan after the Chinese Communist Party invades Taiwan by force, it may not be approved by the Security Council, and may even fail in the vote of the General Assembly. Moreover, the United States' deployment of troops to defend Taiwan involves not only international politics and international law, but also domestic political issues. He said that the US administration must explain to the people at home that if no action is taken, there will be serious consequences and risks for the United States.
Freeman also mentioned that the United States needs to convince those countries that want to remain neutral in the US-China competition that the US actions are to defend the global order, including the economy.
If Taiwan declares independence, what options does the United States have?
Freeman, who is also a non-resident researcher at the Chinese Communist Oceanographic Institute of the U.S. Naval War College, echoed the arguments raised by Xu Kaijie, believing that it is very important to think about these international law issues before the war occurs. However, if Taiwan declares independence in a war, should the United States recognize Taiwan? He said that he has no answer to this question.
"Taking this step and recognizing Taiwan's independence in a crisis would be a political step of no return, because if the United States does this, there is no way back to the status quo of our political relationship with the People's Republic of China," he said. Since the Chinese Communist Party refuses to maintain diplomatic relations with countries that recognize Taiwan as an independent country, the United States must think through these issues very thoroughly, including whether it is possible to sever diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China on the grounds that the Chinese Communist Party has violated the three joint communiqués between the United States and China, but at the same time recognize Taiwan as a political entity?
"In other words, instead of recognizing Beijing as the legitimate government of the Chinese Communist Party and Taiwan as an entity with an undetermined status, perhaps we can say: there are two entities, and they are both undetermined. Is there a third way that can give the United States more legal flexibility so that we don't have to get involved in whether to recognize Taiwan's independence and bang the table to ask the world to follow us?" Freeman said.
He said that he could only raise these questions for everyone to think about, and he did not have the answers.
The Beijing authorities have been stepping up their efforts to crack down on what they call "Taiwan independence separatists". After announcing the new 22-point rule to punish Taiwan independence in mid-June, they set up columns on the official websites of the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council and the Ministry of Public Security to list 10 "Taiwan independence diehards" and report mailboxes. Zhu Fenglian, a spokesperson for the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, said that this move punishes a very small number of diehards who have bad words and deeds related to "independence" and rampant "independence" activities, and does not involve the majority of Taiwan compatriots.
No comments:
Post a Comment