The United States has recently intensified efforts to reinterpret United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758, a pivotal decision made in 1971 that recognized the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legitimate representative of China at the UN.
On May 5, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the “Taiwan International Solidarity Act” unanimously. This act challenges the one-China principle by suggesting that the resolution “did not address the issue of representation of Taiwan and its people in the United Nations or any related organizations.” Similar resolutions were passed earlier this year, urging the U.S. government to oppose what they describe as China’s use of the one-China principle to “coerce” acceptance of its claims over Taiwan.
The U.S. actions aim to undermine the widely recognized one-China principle, which is the foundation of diplomatic relations between the PRC and over 180 countries, including the United States. Critics argue that this approach disregards historical facts and international agreements, potentially destabilizing international norms and the authority of the UN.
In the 1970s and 1980s, China and the U.S. established formal relations based on mutual acknowledgment of the one-China principle, outlined in three joint communiques. However, shifts in global politics and U.S. domestic policy since the 1990s have seen successive American administrations drift from this stance, often substituting it with a “one-China policy.”
The U.S.’s strategic goal to maintain its global influence is seen as a driving force behind these recent moves. By intensifying involvement in Taiwan-related issues, the U.S. seeks to counter China’s rising prominence on the world stage. Additionally, the Taiwan authorities’ efforts to lobby U.S. support have contributed to increased tensions across the Taiwan Strait.
These actions could have significant repercussions for China-U.S. relations. China views the Taiwan question as a core national interest and a domestic matter that permits no external interference. Any deviation from mutual agreements threatens the stability of one of the world’s most critical bilateral relationships.
Observers suggest that continued U.S. interference may only heighten tensions and foster resentment. As China progresses, the goal of national reunification remains a historic mission. It’s argued that a long-term, strategic perspective would better serve all parties involved, encouraging dialogue over discord.
