Taiwan's Membership in International Organizations: David Lee Reveals the Truth
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC) 
A Translation 
December 29, 2016

Executive Summary: The Tsai Trump phone call opened Pandora's Box. How will Taiwan deal with the consequences? That is difficult to predict. But the Mainland has already begun building a high wall to defend one China. Such is the paradox of history. The KMT, which steadfastly defended one China and befriended the Mainland, ironically ensured Taiwan's autonomy. The DPP, which obstinately opposed one China and incited cross-Strait conflict, ironically accelerated the process of cross-Strait reunification.

Full Text Below:

ROC Minister of Foreign Affairs David Lee has responded to Control Yuan inquiries about the difficulties Taiwan has encountered attempting to join international organizations. He admitted that United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 and Mainland insistence on the one China principle have had an effect. With the exception of the WTO and APEC, membership in international organizations is difficult without Beijing's approval. David Lee's remarks made Taiwan independence advocates very uncomfortable. They inadvertently shattered their carefully crafted illusion. Lee believes Taiwan has the right to join the United Nations and other international organizations, regardless of whether the Mainland approves. He said Taiwan could not join these organizations only because the Kuomintang was incompetent and weak when it was in office.

Lies are eventually exposed. Such lies, spread by the DPP after assuming power, cannot withstand scrutiny. The DPP will not be able to continue passing the buck to the KMT. The DPP now enjoys “total governance”. Therefore it must assume “total responsibility”. When it is unable to join international organizations, when diplomatic allies break off relations, it will have to accept responsibility. Some DPP leaders are attempting to shape public opinion. For example, Sao Tome and Principe has severed diplomatic ties with Taiwan. DPP leaders insist this is good for Taiwan, because these countries cannot help Taiwan. Ending diplomatic relations reduces our expenditures. Taiwan needs only to improve relations with major nations, they say. But six months ago, these same people were blasting the Ma administration because Gambia established diplomatic relations with the Mainland. They blamed the Ma government's diplomatic truce for the loss.

In fact, their allegation that small nations cannot help us join international organizations is self-contradictory. Political realities mean that Taiwan must rely on diplomatic partners in the United Nations or other international organizations to increase its exposure, or submit membership requests. As members of these organizations, these nations have the right to invite Taiwan to join. They may not be able to persuade other nations to accept Taiwan. But their requests are an indispensable first step.

The United States Congress often passes legislation that supports Taiwan's accession to international organizations. But these are mostly symbolic gestures, with no binding effect on the executive branch. The United States never advances such proposals in international organizations, still less help Taiwan join them. In other words, even from the most utilitarian perspective of diplomatic relations, few nations consider themselves obliged to help Taiwan.

Many in the DPP persist in self-deception. This hampers Taiwan's understanding of the international situation. It also blinds people to the subtle cross-Strait balance of power. The Mainland has announced the resumption of diplomatic relations with Sao Tome. Many consider this irrelevant. Many mock it. They assume it will further alienate Taiwan from the Mainland. They fail to realize that years of cross-Strait interaction has familiarized the Mainland with Taiwan. The Mainland understands the impact of cross-Strait exchanges and military threats on Taiwan's public opinion. Why has the Mainland exerted diplomatic pressure on Taiwan? Why has it dispatched military aircraft to circle Taiwan? The underlying reason of course is that the Tsai government has refused to recognize the 1992 consensus. But from a tactical perspective, the answer can be found in Mainland policy toward Taiwan, which is carefully measured.

In the past, the two sides have often engaged in diplomatic warfare. During the Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian eras, Taiwan benefited from its economic strength. This enabled it to compete for diplomatic relations with the Mainland. It both gained and lost, but gains outweighed the losses. The Ma government proposed a diplomatic truce. It did so as a gesture of goodwill towards the Mainland. Now however, Taiwan no longer has the ability to compete with the Mainland for diplomatic relations. Never mind diplomatic truce. Taiwan can only hope that the Mainland refrains from competing for diplomatic relations. If the Mainland proceeds, Taiwan can only sit back and watch as other nations drift away, unable to do anything in response. This is the most serious crisis facing Taiwan today. This is the shrill warning the Mainland has issued to Taiwan with the Sao Tome and Principe diplomatic break. David Lee is on the frontlines of this diplomatic battlefield. He feels all of this deeply. That is why he did not deny that Taiwan's participation in international organizations requires Mainland consent. He revealed the reality of Taiwan's plight. The same is true of the imbalance in military strength.

The DPP government finds itself in a dilemma. How will it respond? Other than engage in self-deception, it can do nothing. The DPP government can only take one of two paths. The first is to humble itself and take a hard look at the KMT government's cross-Strait and foreign policies. It must not turn a blind eye to KMT successes in its struggle with the Mainland, merely because of partisan rivalry. It must seek a new consensus with the Mainland, and return to the proper path. The other is to continue blindly down its current path, amidst cross-Strait tensions, toward eventual decline. The Mainland may use the opportunity to continue its attacks, eventually completing the diplomatic and military encirclement of Taiwan. Eventually Taiwan will no longer have any chips to play, and will be forced to accept "reunification without dignity".

President Tsai may attempt to take a third path, namely to maintain the ambiguous status quo. But evolutionary changes have proven that external forces will inexorably erode this ambiguity. The Tsai Trump phone call opened Pandora's Box. How will Taiwan deal with the consequences? That is difficult to predict. But the Mainland has already begun building a high wall to defend one China. As the Mainland sees it, the path of ambiguity will eventually merge with the second path.

Such is the paradox of history. The KMT, which steadfastly defended one China and befriended the Mainland, ironically ensured Taiwan's autonomy. The DPP, which obstinately opposed one China and incited cross-Strait conflict, ironically accelerated the process of cross-Strait reunification.

李大維揭穿的國際空間真相
2016/12/29 中國時報

外交部長李大維答覆監察院詢問有關台灣參與國際組織所面臨的困難及因應作為時，坦言受聯合國大會2758號決議及大陸堅持一中原則影響，除WTO、APEC外，要參與其他國際組織，除非獲得北京允許，否則有相當的困難。李大維這番言論讓獨派很不舒服，他無意間戳破了獨派一直以來所編織的幻夢，認為台灣有權利參與聯合國及各類國際組織，無須理會大陸，台灣之所以無法加入，是國民黨執政時期的無能和軟弱所所致。

謊言終究要被揭開，民進黨的上台讓這種論調再也無法自圓其說，更讓民進黨無法繼續牽拖國民黨，既然完全執政，就要對無法加入國際組織或「被斷交」負起完全責任。現在一些民進黨人開始引導輿論走向，例如聖多美普林西比同台灣斷交，硬說對台灣是一件好事，因為這些國家對台灣無關緊要，斷交反而可以減少金援支出，台灣只要做好與主要大國改善關係工作即可。可就在半年前，同樣一批人還針對甘比亞與大陸建交，指責馬政府外交休兵是失敗的政策。

事實上，小國無用論與加入國際組織目標背道而馳，從政治現實面來看，台灣要在聯合國或者其他國際組織增加曝光率，或提出參與活動提案，都必須委託邦交國，他們作為這些組織會員國，有權提案邀請台灣加入，雖然他們無法說服各國接受，卻是不可缺少的第一步。

至於美國國會常常通過支持台灣加入國際組織的法案，實際上都屬於政治表態行為，根本對行政部門無約束力，美國也不會在國際組織中提出相關提案，遑論幫助台灣加入。換句話說，即便從最功利的角度來審視邦交國，也並非很多人所不屑一顧那樣只是台灣的負債。

許多民進黨人自欺欺人，不但影響了台灣對國際局勢的認知，更讓自己失去了對兩岸力量對比失衡的敏感。大陸宣布與聖多美復交，很多人認為無關緊要，更有很多人諷刺這只會讓台灣更疏離大陸。但他們沒有注意到，大陸經過多年的兩岸互動，早已熟知斷交、軍事威脅等行動對台灣社會輿論的衝擊，既然如此，為何大陸最近還要在外交上施壓台灣，甚至派出軍機、航母繞行台灣？從大背景來看，當然與蔡政府拒不承認九二共識有關，但從具體策略來看，卻可以從中發現大陸對台政策的節奏感。

過去兩岸常有外交爭奪戰，李、扁時期受惠台灣雄厚的經濟實力，還有一定本領與大陸爭奪邦交國，雖然有失有得，畢竟還能有所斬獲；馬政府主動提出外交休兵，還具有對大陸釋出善意的意涵。如今台灣再也沒有能力與大陸競逐邦交國，談不上外交休兵，只能被動寄希望大陸不要爭奪邦交國，如果大陸不配合，也只能束手坐等邦交國流失，毫無反制能力。這才是當下台灣最大的危機所在，這也是大陸通過與聖多美復交所要提供給台灣的最大警訊。身處外交戰場第一線的李大維自然感悟最深，所以他不諱言台灣參與國際組織需要經過大陸同意，這無非就是揭示當前台灣的真實處境。至於軍事實力對比失衡的困境同樣如此。

困局中的民進黨政府該如何因應？除了掩耳盜鈴式自欺欺人之外，恐怕也是束手無策。擺在民進黨政府面前的只有兩條路，一是真正以謙卑的態度重新審視國民黨政府時期的兩岸政策和對外政策，不要因為政黨對立就對國民黨的成功經驗視而不見，並努力與大陸發展新共識，重新回到正確的道路，另一條路則是繼續一意孤行，讓台灣繼續在兩岸關係緊張對立的道路上向下沉淪，大陸也藉此機會不斷出擊，逐步完成對台灣的外交和軍事包圍，到一定階段台灣沒有討價還價能力時，只好接受「沒有尊嚴的統一」。

蔡總統可能打算選擇第三條路，就是模糊到底的維持現狀，但局勢演變已經證明，自己想模糊，但外力總會干擾這種模糊。「英川通話」打開了潘朵拉的魔盒，台灣如何自處尚難預料，大陸卻已經開始築起維護一中的高牆，因為在大陸看來，模糊之路終究要跟第二條路合流。

歷史的弔詭恰恰在此，堅持一中的國民黨因為友善大陸反而保證了台灣的自主性，堅決反對一中的民進黨卻因為挑起了兩岸對立，反而推進了兩岸統一的進程。