Challenging UNGA Resolution 2758 is futile,as one-China principle takes root

By Guo Yichu, a international affairs researcher

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the adoption of UNGA Resolution 2758 to restore the lawful seat of the People’s Republic of China in the United Nations. Many commemorations have been held by the Chinese side and the UN system in China, attracting people from all walks of life and various countries. At such a special moment of commemoration, certain American politicians and think tanks, in collusion with the Democratic Progressive Party (hereinafter referred to as “DPP”) authorities in Taiwan, have begun to spread false arguments on the issue of Taiwan’s so-called “representation at the UN”, distorting UNGA Resolution 2758. Some Americans claim that the Resolution has resolved only the issue of representation of the People’s Republic of China but not that of Taiwan. It is not difficult to tell from the timing that the U.S., with its hegemonic mentality and power politics logic, is trying to use the Taiwan issue again to contain China’s development. The U.S. act has not only violated the three China-U.S. Joint Communiques, but also disregarded the common will of the UN Members and undermined the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. It has endangered peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. Such an act is doomed to failure.

Under the above background, a symposium on the significance of Resolution 2758 was held jointly by the Chinese People’s Institute of Foreign Affairs and the United Nations Association of China. Former senior officials and diplomats, scholars and experts reviewed the content and history of the Resolution, analyzed its political and legal connotation, and rebutted the fallacious remarks of certain U.S. and Taiwan politicians by revealing the hidden political intentions.

The adoption of Resolution 2758 is significant, justified and inevitable.

One of the speakers, 92-year-old Nicolae Ecobescu, attended the General Assembly in 1971 as Deputy Head of the Romanian Delegation to the 26th session of the United Nations General Assembly. He described the day on which Resolution 2758 was adopted as “a great and special day”. When the Resolution was adopted with an overwhelming majority, a prolonged applause broke out in the packed hall. Even some of those who did not vote Yes for various reasons joined the applause. He claimed at the plenary session of UNGA on Oct. 26, 1971, “yesterday evening’s vote [1976th meeting] was a triumph of political wisdom and lucidity, of legality and justice” and, “the anachronistic and irrational policy of isolation pursued towards People’s China has failed.” He called on the international community to rationally oppose such arguments as “two Chinas” and “Taiwan independence” for legal and moral reasons.

Munir Akram, Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations, also attended the 26th session of the UN General Assembly in person. He recalled that China’s friends—the sponsors of Resolution 2758 including Pakistan—were jubilant at the surprise victory as revealed by the pictures taken on that occasion. All those who were at the General Assembly that night were very aware that they had participated in one of the 20th century’s most important, historical events. That experience is an indelible memory in his long diplomatic career.

Thant Myint-U, Visiting Fellow at Trinity College, Cambridge UK and Senior Advisor of World Bank, is grandson of former United Nations Secretary-General U Thant. He mentioned in his speech that, as a civil servant of Burma (now Myanmar) and as Burma’s Representative to the UN before becoming the UN Secretary-General, his grandfather believed very strongly in the admission of the representatives of the People’s Republic of China to the UN. He was very pleased, in the final weeks of his second term in late 1971 after Resolution 2758 was passed, that he was able to personally receive the credentials of the delegation of the People’s Republic of China, even though he was unwell and in hospital. Thant Myint-U regards it as a very fitting way for his grandfather to mark the end of his term as UN Secretary-General.

Resolution 2758 has taken root and shall not be tampered with.

Chen Shiqiu, former senior diplomat of China who has been engaged in treaty and law studies for many years, pointed out that as Resolution 2758 successfully resolved the issue of the lawful seat of the People’s Republic of China in the UN, the one-China principle, widely recognized by the international community, has been endowed with the force of international law. Attempts for Taiwan to reapply to join the UN have no legal and political basis whatsoever, nor will they be possible in practice.

Wu Hailong, President of China Public Diplomacy Association and former senior diplomat of China, summarized the implications of Resolution 2758 as: (a) recognizing that the People’s Republic of China exclusively enjoys China’s lawful seat and rights in the UN and related agencies; (b) defining the Taiwan authorities’ seat in the UN as illegal, denying their representation to the UN and expelling them “from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the UN and in all the organizations related to it”; (c) recognizing Taiwan as a part of China and representatives of the government of the People’s Republic of China as the only legitimate representatives of China to the UN. These three aspects together constitute and fully interpret the one-China principle.

Zhang Hua, expert on Taiwan-related issues including Resolution 2758, developed his argument from the wording of the Resolution. He argued that the use of “restoration” indicates that Resolution 2758 has, from the perspective of international law, recognized the government succession from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China. Naturally, the government of the People’s Republic of China shall also inherit the sovereignty over Taiwan, recovered by the Republic of China on behalf of the Chinese people in 1945.

Liu Yang, former Law Clerk at the International Court of Justice, pointed out that Article 9 and 18 of the UN Charter provides General Assembly to decide competing claims of Member States representation. In the General Assembly Rules of Procedure, Rule 27 indicates that the General Assembly has such competence. According to UNGA Resolution 396(V) made by the General Assembly in 1950, the decision of the General Assembly on representation should be taken into account by all other UN organs and specialized agencies. All UN Member States must abide by Resolution 2758. The fact that the text of Resolution 2758 did not mention Taiwan is merely because the resolution has fully addressed the issue, and no special mention is needed.

Political intentions are hidden in U.S. and Taiwan authorities’ advocacy on Taiwan’s participation in UN affairs.

Donald Ramotar, former President of Guyana, noted that, in spite of the defeat in 1971, the reactionary forces continue to pursue a line of “independence for Taiwan”. That is a deliberate provocation in creating tensions in the region and is illegal.

Aly El-Hefny Mahmoud, former Deputy Foreign Minister of Egypt and former Ambassador of Egypt to China, stated that, recently, the U.S. has come up with an extremely provocative, unbelievable and illogical issue as an attempt to reopen the matter of the membership of the People’s Republic of China in the UN and to drag the whole international community to an unnecessary debate about Taiwan and its “membership” in the United Nations.

Zaitsev Evgenii, a Russian scholar who has thoroughly studied Resolution 2758, noted that the Taiwan authorities, represented by the head of the DPP, Tsai Ing-wen, are persistently trying to aggravate the situation and hinder the process of peaceful unification, putting forward such slogans as “Taiwan independence” and “Taiwanese are not Chinese”. It can be assumed, he believes, that talking about independence under the conditions of full control executed by the United States and provoking a military conflict in the Taiwan Strait, Tsai Ing-wen, in fact, returns Taiwan to the humiliating times for China, when foreign colonialists ruled the island.

Wu Hailong talked about the international context in which US politicians advocated “Taiwan’s meaningful participation throughout the UN system and in the international community”, and concluded that their true intention is to contain China with the Taiwan issue and to help the DPP authorities seek “independence”, thus changing the cross-strait status quo by bringing about tensions and crises to the cross-Strait relations.

Zhang Hua stated that the U.S. and Taiwan authorities are questioning Resolution 2758’s effect on resolving “Taiwan’s representation” for pure political ends rather than legal or procedural ones as it appeared. This is a typical approach for “Taiwan independence” forces to make up theoretical basis for “Taiwan independence” and had been pursued by the Lee Teng-hui authorities in the 1990s.

It is proved by the voice of the international community that any act that goes against the spirit of Resolution 2758 leads to a retrogression of history. The U.S. and Taiwan authorities, by distorting Resolution 2758 to pave the path for “Taiwan’s meaningful participation” and for “Taiwan independence”, intentionally brought up an issue that has long been settled by the international community. The essence of their acts is nothing but political manipulation aimed at changing the cross-strait status quo and containing China’s development. Such acts, without any legal basis, will never be accepted by the international community that upholds justice and are bound to fail.

（All data and information provided on this site is for informational purposes only. en.gmw.cn makes no representations as to accuracy, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis.）