KMT Press Release

KMT Press Release
June 28, 2007

KMT Secretary-General Wu Den-yih announced on June 28 the KMT’s proposal to hold a plebiscite entitled “Returning to the UN and Joining Other International Organizations”. After the proposal for plebiscite is endorsed by the KMT Central Standing Committee next Wednesday, the drive for collecting signatures will begin for presenting the petition.

Below is the KMT statement regarding its proposed “Returning to the UN and Joining Other International Organizations” plebiscite:

Proposed Plebiscite Title in Full:

“Adopting a pragmatic approach in the push for returning to the UN and joining other international organizations.”

Proposed Question:

Do you agree that our country should adopt a pragmatic and flexible approach in choosing a name to apply for returning to the United Nations and joining other international organizations? That is, do you agree that our country should apply for readmission to the United Nations or join other international organizations under the name of Republic of China, Taiwan, or another name with dignity and better chance of success?


Explanatory Note for the Plebiscite


Applying for readmission to the United Nation and joining other international organizations has been an important policy for Taiwan in its attempt to return to the international community, and it is the common aspirations of all the people. However, due to the obstruction of Mainland China, our efforts to return to the United Nation have met with setbacks. Therefore, in order to broaden support from the international community, we should adopt a more pragmatic and flexible approach in choosing a name when applying for readmission to the United Nations or other international organizations. Hence, the KMT suggests that we apply for readmission to the United Nation or join other international organizations under the name of the Republic of China, Taiwan, or other names with dignity and better chance of success.

I. Why the KMT wants to push for a plebiscite entitled “Returning to the United Nations and Joining Other International Organziations”:

1) The ROC’s historical legitimacy in the UN: The Republic of China was a founding member of the United Nations. The United Nations, giving in to Mainland China’s pressure, adopted Resolution 2758 in 1971, sacrificing the rights and interests of the Republic of China, and leaving the 23 million people on Taiwan without representation. Since then, under the pressure of Mainland China, the ROC has been forced out of other international organizations as well.

2) The reasonable demand of 23 million people to participate in the international community and international organizations
The Republic of China is a sovereign state and deserves equal status with other countries in the international community. The UN to date does not allow the ROC to become a member state, which not only contravenes the principle of universality, but also ignores the rights and interests of 23 million people. Particularly, with ever expanding globalization, different kinds of international organizations are required to coordinate and promote cooperation between states in their complex relationships. Taiwan is an important player in the international community, but for more than three decades in the past has been shut out of important organizations for no reason. This severely harms the rights and interests of all the people in Taiwan and impedes the solution of many international problems that require Taiwan’s participation.

3) The efforts made to return to the UN by the KMT when it was in power

In the 1990s, the KMT, as the ruling party, pushed for Taiwan’s democratization and considered returning to the UN an important policy as well, in order to break through diplomatic isolation. From 1993, the KMT administration mobilized our allies to support our return to the UN. Unfortunately, due to mainland China’s obstruction, our efforts were not successful.

4) Most people support returning to the UN

Many surveys have shown that the majority of Taiwanese people have supported the government’s efforts to return to the UN since 1994. Whether in power or opposition, the KMT reflects the mainstream opinion, stands by the peoples’ side and takes the international situation into consideration as a whole. The KMT sincerely believes that we should expand the scope of our efforts to return to the international organizations, including the UN and other international organizations, in accordance with the interests of Taiwan.

II The KMT strategy for pushing to return to the UN and join other international organizations

Taiwan should adapt a pragmatic and flexible approach to its designation in order to increase the chances of success
Mainland China is the primary obstacle impeding Taiwan’s presence in the international community. As we know from past experience, there is greater chance for failure if we stick to a specific designation or rigid approach. Relatively, it is easier for us to gain support from the international community if we adopt a pragmatic and flexible strategy. For example, we used the designation “Chinese Taipei” to rejoin the IOC and to join APEC and the designation “the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu”, which was later also abbreviated to “Chinese Taipei”, to join the GATT/WTO.

From these successful cases, we know we must be pragmatic rather than impracticable if we are to rejoin the international community. Only by first joining can we then expand our influence in order to protect Taiwan’s basic rights and interests. Therefore, we advocate that we should maintain flexibility in adopting a designation to rejoin the UN and join other international organizations. “The Republic of China”, “Taiwan”, or any other names that can help to achieve our goal and maintain our dignity should not be precluded.

III. The differences between the KMT and the DPP in their approaches to rejoining the UN

1) Both the KMT and the DPP support Taiwan returning to the UN and joining other international organizations, but their approaches towards this goal are totally different. Whereas the KMT is sincere in its objective to rejoin the international community, the DPP’s objective, however, is to “get out the voters”.

2) The approach of the KMT has always been more pragmatic and flexible than that of the DPP. Taiwan rejoined the IOC, and joined APEC and the WTO when the KMT was the ruling party. The DPP not only has insufficient experience in international affairs, but more importantly, it takes advantage of events to manipulate domestic politics or as an election campaign strategy, with no long-term view. Maybe it can accumulate some political momentum in the short time, but it will repeatedly squeeze Taiwan’s international space in the long run. In contrast, the KMT proposes that Taiwan should not confine itself to one single designation or a fixed model in its attempt to return to the UN or other international organizations, but should be more flexible. The DPP’s true motivation is doubtful. It calculatingly insists on the name of Taiwan to purposely manipulate the “victim card” in the diplomatic world. Since Taiwan’s goal is to return to the international community, we should not isolate ourselves from the world only over the issue of designations.

3) The DPP is not sincere in pushing forward its plebiscite on UN re-entry. Its real intention is to play for sympathy by intensifying opposition from the world and Mainland China and thereby gain election advantage. However, the KMT’s plebiscite is proposed with an earnest attitude in the hope of expanding Taiwan’s international space in a pragmatic, flexible manner and with dignity.

4) The DPP only accepts re-entry to the UN under a single name: “Taiwan”. The KMT puts forward a more flexible approach that is both beneficial to Taiwan and conforms to Taiwan’s dignity in our effort to return to the UN and join other international organizations. Contrasting the two approaches, the DPP’s method is like a single vitamin supplement, whereas the KMT’s approach is like a multiple-vitamin: it provides the most needed elements in advancing Taiwan’s international status.

5) In insisting on adopting the title “Taiwan” to ‘join’ the UN, the DPP is promoting a concept of the ‘Republic of Taiwan’. “Taiwan” to the DPP refers to the ‘Republic of Taiwan’, but for the KMT, “Taiwan” is the “Republic of China” The KMT whole-heartedly loves Taiwan and loves Taiwan in a right manner, and will adopt the right approach to return to the UN and join other international organizations.

Attachment : none