From: jaskew@spam.ua.oz (Joseph Askew)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: PARTRIOTS FOR TAIWAN
Summary: Not quite
Date: 25 Jan 93 05:56:56 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.china
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Statistics, Pure & Applied Mathematics, University of Adelaide

In article <35638@sales.GBA.NYU.EDU> myang@sales.GBA.NYU.EDU (Ming the Merciless) writes:
>>From: joe@athena.mit.edu (Joseph C Wang)

>>>1) UN had always acted on the interests of the US and NATO.  (few exceptions)

Actually the UN has a very very poor record of doing what the US wants. It
is because of this that the US and Britain hold the first and second place
for the number of vetos they have done. I believe the US has vetoed more
resolutions than China, France and the USSR put together.

>>>2) Taiwan was recognized as the offical government of China until 1971, when

Only by the US and the UN. Britain recognised the PRC in 1949 (I think). There
were definitely British businessmen doing business with the Communists in 1948
This had the full approval of the British government. I think Australia
recognised the PRC as the CG in 1970 but I am not sure (too slow anyway).

>>>4) Taiwan has the option to declare independence from China and be officially
>>> recognized by UN.

>It was to my understanding that the situation regarding to Taiwan being
>accepted to the UN is considered as "standard procedure".  And in a standard
>procedure, the permanent members of the Security Council need not be unanimous.

It maybe standard procedure but it won't happen if the PRC objects. It still
can be vetoed and besides the UN does not like to do controversial things.
Look at the mess over the two Koreas. Eventually they will both enter the UN
but for years the USSR and US was able to keep the South and North out.

>Also, the motion to defend would be ROT from a military attack is also
>considered as "standard Procedure".  This "standard procedure" came into
>effect since the Korean War issue.

No it hasn't. If the PRC attacks Taiwan the UN can do *nothing*. This is
why nothing happened when the USSR attack Afghanistan or when the US invaded
Panama. These countries can veto anything the UN does. It is unlikely that
the UN will intervene in Bosnia because Russia (which holds the USSR's seat)
is a traditional ally of the Serbs and will stop it. There is no standard
procedure for any conflict because they are all different. Noone can decide
*before* a conflict who is to blame. In Taiwans case the UN already recognises
Taiwan to be part of China, the PRC to be the government of China and hence
any invasion of Taiwan would not be an invasion it would be an internal matter.
The UN is bound by its Constitution only to listen to external problems between
nations. It is not allowed to interfere in the internal affairs of individual
governments although it sometimes does anyway (eg South Africa). In fact most
of the countries in the world would be embarrassed by an invasion of Taiwan
as they too recognise Taiwan to be part of China. Noone would say that the
US is not allowed to send troops to Hawaii (or LA) if the President wanted
to so they might have problems objecting to a PRC invasion of Taiwan!


Joseph Askew


-- 
Joseph Askew, Gauche and Proud  Barbarian horns draw out the northern wind;
jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu  Paler than water lies the Thistle Pass;
Disclaimer? Sue, see if I care  Sky swallows up the road to Kokonor;
One China One Korea One Eire32  Moonlight, a thousand miles along the Wall.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china