Chapter I –Introduction
1.5 Theoretical Framework
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4
Qualitative research is multi-method in scope, involving interpretive and naturalistic approaches to its subject matter. This means that the qualitative researcher studies things in his natural environment, in an attempt to make sense or to better interpret the phenomena, according to the meaning attributed by others. The qualitative research allows us to develop explanations and generalizations that are close to concrete data and context but are more than simple generalizations (Denzin and Lincoln, 1998). This method performs a careful analysis of content of the available primary and secondary sources such as speeches, academic studies, interviews, government reports speeches, press statements, etc (Costa, 2007).
For this study, both primary and secondary texts have been used. The primary data is essentially information obtained from international treaties, government reports and interviews. This has included government reports related to trade statistics (i.e. Bureau of Foreign Trade), and interviews I am expecting to conduct with the Africa Taiwan Economic Forum director-general, Dr. Richard Lin. Secondary sources have been obtained from several sources such as books, academic journals, conference papers, master and doctoral thesis on related themes (the ROC’s foreign policy, the ROC relations with the African countries, the PRC’s foreign diplomacy, and the PRC’s political and economic relations with Africa) and other internet publications.
1.4 Limitations of the Study
For this study the author would have preferred to conduct the proposed research in Africa, namely in Angola, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, South Africa and Liberia in order be able to do interviews with officials and academics whose expertise is related to Sino-Africa relations. However due to limitations of funds and time, this study will only be undertaken based on the use of primary and secondary sources.
1.5 Theoretical Framework
The ROC’s diplomatic interactions with the African states have deteriorated over time. This relationship has been characterized by an increasing number of countries whose decisions concerning the ‘two Chinas’ issue have largely contributed to the ROC’s current
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
5
weak diplomatic presence in Africa. In other words, the majority of the African states have tended to recognize the PRC at the expense of the ROC under the “one China” principle.
Unlike Taipei, which since 1971 has seen its overall political clout being reduced as a result of its withdrawal of the UN and the loss of its main ally, the United States, Beijing has been able to gradually assert its influence in world affairs. This growing global influence has naturally been felt in Africa where the PRC’s presence is nowadays almost impossible to ignore. As mentioned above, China is today the world’s second largest economy and is Africa’s biggest trading partner. Moreover, through FOCAC, the PRC’s engagement with Africa has over the past decade grown to become a prominent feature in the international relations of the African continent. As a result, in the ‘two Chinas’ quarrel, African states, with few exceptions, have hardly ignored the leading position Beijing has been playing on the continent and prompted to engage in official diplomatic relations with the PRC at the expense of the ROC. In this study proposes the idea that sub-Saharan states have over time entered into official relations with the PRC due to its capacity to advance these countries’
domestic and foreign policy interests. In order to sustain this idea, the author has decided to apply in this project the ‘Neorealist’ theory and its ‘bandwagon’ behavior.
The Neorealist theory, which has become largely associated with Kenneth Waltz, is the foundational theory of international relations and tries to explain the behavior of states and their interactions with one another in the world affairs. According to the neorealist theory, states anarchically compete for survival in the international arena, causing them to behave rationally in order to insure survival. It is in this context of a desire for survival that the neorealist theory establishes its concept of balance of power in which, unlike the classic realism, countries are not automatically inclined to align themselves against one another for survival because they can display a group behavior (bandwagon) which is also beneficial for their interests. This ‘bandwagon’ behavior is often visible when a state is characterized as leading all others tend to follow it, because they want to be aligned with the forces in power rather than against them.
In analyzing the possible reasons refraining sub-Saharan African states to enter into official relations with the ROC, I would argue that these countries have tended to
‘bandwagon’ towards the PRC. Taking into account Taipei’s current diplomatic situation in Africa, and the aforementioned factors shaping the current relations between Beijing and
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
6
Africa, the decision of the sub-Saharan African States in siding with the PRC at the expense of the ROC, seems to display patterns a ‘bandwagon’ behavior, in which states in the pursuit of their interests tend to side with the leader. In this regard, this study proposes a layout grouping together countries with similar national interests and foreign policy goals which have been important factors prompting these states to ‘bandwagon’ towards the PRC, thus contributing to the ROC’s current diplomatic isolation in Africa. The nature of this study and the theory proposed will not only require an examination of the ROC’s relations with Africa in the last fifty years, but also a careful analysis of the African states domestic politics and their positions towards the ‘two Chinas’ diplomatic quarrel.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
7 CHAPTER II
2. The ROC since 1971 and its Need for International Recognition
2.1. The ROC’s Quest for International Recognition
Since the loss of its seat in the United Nations (UN) as the sole legal representative of the whole China in 1971, the ROC has been struggling to regain its international legitimacy as a sovereign state. From 1949 to 1970 the seat in the UN General Assembly and Security Council conferred the ROC wide international recognition and security, but the crucial UN General Assembly 2758 resolution profoundly altered this scenario. From then on, the PRC began to be recognized as the only legal representative of the people of the mainland China in the U.N, and the ROC delegation, under orders of Chiang Kai-shek, walked out of the UN to prevent further humiliation (Winkler, 2012). This event coupled with efforts by the PRC to further isolate the ROC has resulted in an accelerated loss of international recognition. This trend was further accentuated by the decision of the American government to switch recognition to Beijing, thus leaving the ROC without any world superpower defending its cause. Upon Washington’s' formal recognition of Beijing in 1979, most other holdouts followed suit, leaving only a few countries retaining official recognition of Taipei (Rich, 2009).
Facing international isolation since the PRC admission to the UN in 1971 and the establishment of the U.S.-PRC diplomatic relations in 1979, the ROC government on Taiwan has tried to ameliorate its international position. The 1973 declaration of ‘total diplomacy’3 by the then Premier Jiang Jing-guo became the foundation of ‘pragmatic diplomacy’ or ‘flexible diplomacy’ which would be launched by then President Lee Teng-hui in 1988, that called for (Chan, 2003; Yahuda, 1996):
1. The advancement and reinforcement of formal diplomatic ties;
3 Diplomacy conducted not only by the central government but also by virtually all other actors who have contact with diplomatic circles: local governments, political parties, non-governmental organizations, parliamentarians, business people and ordinary folk. Such diplomacy is multi-directional. It sought to, promote the mobilization of all available resources in order to escape isolation.
‧
2. The development of substantive relations with countries that do not maintain formal ties with the ROC on Taiwan;
3. Admission or readmission to international organizations and activities vital to the country’s national interest;
The pursuit for international recognition of its sovereignty became the ROC's primary foreign policy goal. For decades since 1971, the ROC on Taiwan has engaged in multiple activities and adopted numerous policies in order to expand its international space (Larus, 2006). As mentioned above, President Jiang Jing-guo, initiated the aforementioned so-called “total diplomacy”; President Lee Teng-hui adopted a foreign policy of “pragmatic diplomacy” in which it sought to maintain unofficial relations with nations that had established diplomatic relations with the PRC, while also pursuing a more active diplomatic and economic based relationship with the Southeast Asian countries under the “southward policy” (Larus, 2006). Whereas President Chen Shui-bian continued to use flexible diplomacy to widen Taipei’s international space, the current Ma Ying- jeou's presidency has adopted a flexible diplomacy policy of accommodation (Wang, n.d). That is, the ROC will pursue its diplomacy with the precondition of maintaining friendly and cooperative relations with the PRC4.
It is generally accepted that the resilience demonstrated over time by the ROC’s successive administrations and their creative and innovative foreign policy have brought positive results in Taipei’s quest for diplomatic recognition. Despite the veracity of the statement, especially when one takes into account certain periods of time5, I would argue that overall the success of this pursuit has been limited. Contributing to this is the role the PRC has been playing over time concerning Taipei's struggle for survival. For instance, although the ROC dropped its claim to the mainland and has been open to dual recognition since 1991, Beijing’s assertiveness regarding the “One China” policy has remained unchanged, a circumstance which has hampered the efforts of Taipei from attaining any
4 The reasons for President’s Ma new approach: 1).Taipei realizes Beijing’s rising power and influence in the world. It will be difficult for it to develop diplomacy without reducing China’s suppression. 2).the ROC can avoid spending unnecessary resources in pursuing its diplomatic interests by bringing to an end the diplomatic battle with the PRC. The ROC can avoid being considered as an unstable actor in East Asia region by not taking a defiant diplomacy against the PRC.
5 the policies adopted during Lee Teng-hui’s presidency in the 1990s have achieved some success in fostering new diplomatic relations.
‧
significant progress in increasing formal recognition (Rich, 2009). Given the PRC’s growing influence in the world affairs, few nations dare to establish formal relations with the ROC on Taiwan and sacrifice their official diplomatic links with Beijing. The table 1 displays the decreasing number of the ROC’s diplomatic allies since 1971, a rapid decline which is hard to ignore.
Table.1 The ROC’s Diplomatic Allies, 1971-2015 Year
Source: Elaborated by the author with data retrieved from: Where is Taiwan? 2012; Thinking Taiwan, 2013 Wikipedia, 2015; MOFA, 2015;
Despite the trend of derecognition that has been affecting the ROC on Taiwan since 1971, and the fierce opposition displayed by the PRC over the last decades, Taipei has not given up on its pursuit for the legitimization of its sovereignty and presence in international organizations. Diplomatic recognition matters for Taipei and Africa has become one of the arenas where the ROC has intensively conducted its foreign policy and tried to increase its presence. However, the current scenario is not ideal and the future doesn’t seem to be promising. Currently, the ROC enjoys official diplomatic relations with 22 countries, of which only three of them are in Africa (The Kingdom of Swaziland, Burkina Faso and Sao Tome and Principe) (MOFA, 2015).
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
10 Fig.1 The ROC’s Remaining Diplomatic Allies
Source: https://www.stratfor.com/sample/analysis/taiwan-loses-diplomatic-ally
As the purpose of this thesis is to analyze the reasons behind the decisions of sub-Saharan African countries to break off their diplomatic ties with the ROC, I found that two questions should be answered in this context: what is diplomatic recognition and why is this recognition important for the ROC on Taiwan? This analysis will be particularly helpful for a better understanding of the need for the ROC to have diplomatic allies and the consequences that the trend of derecognition may have in the future of the nation.
2.2 International Recognition and its Importance
International recognition is defined in legal terms as a unilateral act by which a state expresses its readiness to enter into juridical relations with another state or entity under international law, and to conduct full diplomatic, consular or other relations with it.
International recognition is seen as a voluntary declaration of intent and does not impose any obligation on the recognizing state (Akaba, 2011). There are essentially two theoretical models connected to the recognition of states: the constitutive theory and the declaratory theory (Carbonnier, n.d). The first one, the constitutive theory, considers that the act of
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
11
recognition by other states determines the existence of a new state and grants it an international legal personality. Its implications are that the new state is established as an international person by virtue of the will and consent of already existing states (Abdulrahim, 2009).
The second one is the declaratory theory. According to the declaratory theory, a state must fulfill four criteria before it can be accepted as a state in the international community. This criterion is based on the Article 1 of the Montevideo Declaration which will be explained below. This type of recognition has no legal effects and it is purely a fact.
Thus if the entity is able to properly comply with the requirements of a state , it is a state with all international rights and duties, and therefore other states have the obligation to treat it as such (Abdulrahim, 2011; Carbonnier, n.d; Yamali, 2009).
In the past, the constitutive theory had its achievements. In the 19th Century, international law was regarded as applying mainly between states within Europe (Abdulrahim, 2011). Other nations would be admitted as states to this community only if they could attain recognition from those member states. Nowadays, recognition can occasionally have a constitutive effect, although state practice is not always consistent.
When the creation of a new state or government is not in accordance with international law, this state or government is most of the times considered as having no legal existence until it is recognized (Abdulrahim, 2011).
Yet, currently the main view is that recognition is declaratory and does not create a state.
This view was laid down in the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States of 1933. The Article 3 of the Convention states that: “The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence” (Montevideo Convention, 1933).
In fact, the two theories provide little contribution in explaining recognition or determining the status of non-recognized entities in practice. Moreover, in my opinion the distinction between them is of little significance. According to the declaratory theory, deciding whether a new entity satisfies the criteria of statehood depends on the decision of other states, and the granting formal recognition to a new state (considered a unilateral act) is left to the political discretion of states. On the other hand, the importance of the constitutive theory has lost relevance due to the obligation imposed on states to treat an
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
12
entity that satisfies the criteria of statehood as a state. Moreover, since recognition has a political side, the state's practice regarding recognition shows that states prefer a middle way between the aforementioned theories (Yamali, 2009; Abdulrahim, 2011).
According to Yamali (2009) International law is constituted by states and it is concerned with the activities and the transactions of states. However, if roughly 50 years ago the general consensus was that states were the only legal persons of the international law, nowadays this conception has broadened and participants can be regarded as: states, international organizations, regional organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), public enterprises, private companies and individuals (Yamali, 2009).
According to international law an entity able to meet the international legal criteria of statehood is able to become a state. In this regard, The Montevideo Convention6 sets out the requirements for statehood in its well known Article 1. The criteria for statehood as determined by the Convention are: (1) a permanent population, (2) a defined territory, (3) government (4) the capacity to enter into relations with other states (Aynete, 2011). .
1. Permanent population: population is crucial for the existence of a state, as is indicated in Article 1; a permanent population does not mean that the population has to be static at one place. Rather, it takes into account pastoralists who move seasonally from place to place. Additionally, the size of the population is not an essential requirement.
2. Territory: the territory where the permanent population resides does not imply that the boundaries have to be defined precisely. Thus a border dispute with another country does not cast doubt on the territorial status of a country. It is only important that a country has a clear core territory in order to be a state.
3. Government: A state requires a government functioning as a political body and in accordance with the law and the nation’s constitution. The government needs to exercise effective power over its territory and citizens.
4. Capacity to enter into relations with other states: defines the new entity’s recognition by other states so that they have the capacity to start relations (Aynete, 2011).
6 The Montevideo Convention: treaty signed at Montevideo, Uruguay, on December 26, 1933. The Convention codified the declarative theory of statehood as accepted as part of customary international law.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
13
The ROC, and other disputed territories (e.g., Somaliland or the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic), clearly meet these requirements for statehood (Rich, 2009). Yet, the recognition of a state internationally is rarely based on internal sovereignty, since sovereignty has both internal and external dimensions (Payen & Veney, 2001). Some authors such as Rich (2009) says that a political community claiming sovereignty, even if judged by outsiders as legitimate, cannot be called a state if in practice it cannot assert this right. In order to legitimize sovereignty claims, many entities attempt to mirror the actions of recognized states in order to be perceived as such (Rich, 2009). For instance, many disputed states (e.g. the ROC on Taiwan) declare their consent to international agreements and declarations of which they were not signatories as a means of legitimizing their claims to statehood. In 2007, Taipei, in its annual application for UN membership stated:
(Washington Times, 2007):
“We meet all of the attributes of statehood set forth in the 1933 Montevideo Convention — a permanent population (with 23 million people, we’re larger than 60 percent of U.N.
member states), a defined territory and the ability to enter into relations with other states.
Article 4 of the convention provides, “The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by other states.”
“We respect all of the rights enunciated in the 1948 U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, which many U.N. member states routinely violate. Still, they’re members in good standing and we’re not.”
Although there may be degrees of external sovereignty, a more precise indicator is diplomatic recognition (Rich, 2009).
Other authors such as Newnham (2000) contend that the very definition of state sovereignty must include diplomatic recognition. In other words, sovereignty can be conceived not only as the recognition of internal actors but also attributed to the state by other states (Payne & Veney, 2001). The greater the number of states extending diplomatic recognition to a state, the greater is the sense of external legitimacy. Moreover, recognition
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
14
is crucial to define a state's membership in the world community as well as to support its claim as an international person.
Currently the ROC on Taiwan is in a difficult position, with only 22 nations
Currently the ROC on Taiwan is in a difficult position, with only 22 nations