Chinese expansionism has not only economic characteristics, but is also aimed at assert China’s rights on the waters of South China Sea and in Taiwan Strait. As for the South China Sea, it is the famous “line of nine lines” which would constitute the projection of the continental shelf and of the exclusive economic zone of islands, reefs and adjoining man-made constructions to the Chinese landmass, declared illegitimate in 2016 by an Arbitral Tribunal established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, to which China is a party. This was reiterated by the G7 foreign affairs ministers in the final communiqué of the Tokyo meeting on 18 April.
Ministers said they were concerned about other Chinese maritime claims. Among these, although not expressly named, are the waters of the Taiwan Strait. It is a strait in the geographical sense and not in the juridical sense, since the territorial waters of the opposite coasts, i.e. the mainland and the island, do not cover all the waters of the strait, but leave a wide corridor of high seas, subject to free navigation of merchant and military fleets and overflights of civil and military aircraft. In this regard, the status of Taiwan is irrelevant, whether it is an independent state or a territory belonging to the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
The status of Taiwan: brief historical notes
The status of Taiwan is the subject of disputes, which certainly do not help to find a political solution based on the principles of international law.
A short Historical reconstruction it’s necessary. Taiwan was born in 1949, after the civil war ended in favor of the Communist Party of China and the Nationalist government of Ciang Kai-shek was forced to retreat to the island. However, independence was not proclaimed, but the Nationalist government still thought of itself as the government of all of Chinaas indeed did the government of Mao Zedong, who considered the Chiang regime only a rebel regime.
The question was anything but theoretical, since China, according to the charter of the United Nations, had a permanent seat on the Security Council. Which of the two governments had the right to represent it? Until 1971 the seat at the United Nations was occupied by the nationalist government, but starting from October 25, 1971 the government of the PRC was installed, defined by the resolution 2758 of the United Nations General Assembly as the only legitimate government of China and at the same time the delegates of Chiang Kai-shek, who “illegally” occupied the Chinese seat, were expelled.
To maintain diplomatic relations, China demanded that the PRC be recognized as the sole government of China and immediately cut off diplomatic relations with Taiwan. Which Western governments rushed to do, including the United States since 1979. Currently, only very few states recognize Taiwan and their numbers have long been declining. The Western states Liaison offices have opened in Taipei to allow for the conduct of essentially commercial relationships.
Rebels and legitimate government
In China, revolutionary regime change has allowed insurgents to replace the established government and for it to function in a fraction of the territory, while still claiming to be the government of all of China. But the sides have long since reversed. What was the rebel government has become the established government, while what was the constituted government has become the rebel government. Put in these terms, the solution is obligatory: the constituted government has every right to defeat the rebel government, i.e. the PRC is entitled to take back Taiwan, using force if necessary.
At the opposite conclusion you come, if you admit that by now secession is a fait accompli and that Taiwan is an independent state. If this were the case, the use of force by the PRC to conquer Taiwan would constitute a violation of the UN Charter, qualifying as aggression. But is Taiwan a state? It has all the elements (territory, population and government), except for the will to consider itself a new state, having not even made a declaration of independence.
The behavior of third states must be judged in the light of the two theories. If Taiwan is just a rebel governmentthird parties would commit a illicit if they intervene in favor of Taiwan. In reverse, if Taiwan is a state: it would be alloweduse of force in his favor in collective self-defense.
Which solution?
The wish is one peaceful solution of the matter. The main players seem to exclude it, but the PRC has not yet crossed the Rubicon despite resorting to military maneuvers quite intrusive. The United States supplies Taiwan with weaponsbut are wary of resurrecting the mutual assistance treaty they abrogated in 1980. Europeanseven if they don’t fully agree with Macron’s statements after his recent visit to China, they have no interest in imposing heavy sanctions on China, which is an important trading partner.
A peaceful solution could consist in incorporating Taiwan (the so-called reunification), leaving it with considerable autonomy and self-government, starting with the enjoyment of human rights. But the example of Hong Kong doesn’t really play in favor of such a solution. Furthermore, who would guarantee the statute of autonomy?
Better then to leave things in their place, with Taiwan as a de facto independent entity, but with a status that does not allow it full participation as a member of the international community. How long this situation will last is difficult to say. Essential are the US policy of support for Taiwan in its current form, which ends up playing a deterrent role, and the contrast to Chinese ambitions in adjacent seas, including maintaining the high seas route between mainland China and the island .