I.
The Republic of China is one of the founding members of the United Nations. At this time sixteen years ago, on June 26, 1945, China was the first country to sign the United Nations Charter at the San Francisco Conference; and China ratified the Charter soon afterwards. The Constitution of the Republic of China provides that its foreign policy shall be based on respect for... the Charter of the United Nations ... in order to promote international cooperation, advance international justice, and ensure world peace." Throughout the past sixteen years, China has given her full support to the United Nations Charter and observed all obligations required of a member state under the Charter. She has played a significant role and achieved an honorable record in the United Nations.
Since the removal of the seat of the Chinese Government to the province of Taiwan, the Soviet bloc and pro-Communist countries have attempted to have the United Nations admit the Chinese Communist regime in place of the Government of the Republic of China. Thus, the so-called question of China's representation has been repeatedly raised in the United Nations General Assembly, the Security Council and other international bodies. As a result of concerted efforts of our own Government and our many friends, the Soviet Union and its cohorts have failed in their machinations. The firm support given us in this connection by the United States Government and its people in the past eleven years is particularly a source of gratification.
However, owing to the drastic changes in the world situation in recent years, the United Nations today is no longer the organization for safeguarding world peace and security as envisaged by us at the time when the Charter was drafted at the San Francisco Conference. The failure to achieve unity among the free nation members, coupled with the rapid increase in membership, has upset the earlier equilibrium in the United Nations and thereby provided the Communist bloc with greater opportunities for its destructive manipulations. The Soviet Union has in fact engaged in a series of cold war offensives designed to disable and dismember the United Nations. Its advocacy for rewriting the United Nations Charter, its exploitation of the contradictions between the neutralist states and other free nations and its pressure to reorganize the U.N. Secretariat on the so-called "troika" basis so as to give the Communist bloc a veto even in the Secretariat—all these are designed to destroy the United Nations. It was Soviet Russia, too, which created and aggravated the problems of Congo, Laos and Cuba as part and parcel of its overall offensive against the free world. At the same time, by exploiting such issues as disarmament and U.N. membership for Outer Mongolia, the Soviet Union has sought to defeat the free nations through intimidation and extortion. Consequently, the United Nations has been thrown into a state of confusion and helplessness; and the force of justice which the world body is meant to represent has been greatly weakened.
It is under these circumstances that the Soviet bloc, with the help of certain pro-Communist governments and advocates of international appeasement, has intensified its campaign to bring the puppet Peiping regime into the United Nations. The Communists and their collaborators have deliberately over-stressed the importance of the Peiping regime in connection with the disarmament problem with a view to further pressing this campaign. Even in countries friendly to us, certain people who profess to be against Communism have shown a tendency to compromise on the issue of Chinese Communist entry into the United Nations by advancing the so-called "two Chinas" theory in complete disregard of consequences, not to say the moral consideration of right and wrong. Thus the moratorium formula which has been effectively used in the past in dealing with this problem is now made a subject of public skepticism.
All this indicates that we are now faced with a most difficult situation on the question of China's representation in the United Nations. The 16th Session of the U. N. General Assembly will be opened on September 19. How to keep intact our legitimate position in the world body and to defeat the Soviet attempt to force the puppet Peiping regime's way into the United Nations constitute indeed a task of the greatest importance in the conduct of our foreign relations.
II
The question of China's representation first came to the fore in the United Nations during the 5th Regular Session of the U.N. General Assembly in 1950 which rejected outright the proposal submitted by the Soviet Union and India to unseat the Republic of China in favor of the Peiping regime. However, since the 6th Session of the U.N. General Assembly in 1951, this issue has been dealt with on the basis of the moratorium formula proposed by our allies, by Thailand at the 6th Session and by the United States since the 7th Session. The moratorium formula as adopted in the past years consists of two parts; in the first part, the General Assembly decides not to include in its agenda the proposal to unseat the Republic of China in favor of the Peiping regime; and in the second part, the General Assembly decides not to discuss any such proposal for the duration of its current session.
The moratorium formula was adopted as a means to secure the cooperation of those free countries which had already recognized the Chinese Communist regime. Such countries, while not in a position to support our representation as a substantive matter, agreed to the formula whereby the question of Chinese representation would be temporarily shelved on a procedural basis. So far as we are concerned, the moratorium formula is not an entirely satisfactory one. For in the view of the Chinese Government, the legitimate status of the Republic of China as a member of the United Nations calls for unqualified confirmation by the world organization. On the other hand, the formula is not unacceptable to us, because the United Nations is justified in refusing to discuss the question of China's representation, which should not have arisen in the first place.
During the successive sessions of the U.N. General Assembly in recent years, the margin between the favorable and unfavorable votes received by the moratorium formula has gradually narrowed for various reasons. While the trend is undoubtedly a cause for concern, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs takes the view, as a result of careful study, that the situation should be dealt with by the positive approach of securing greater support for the moratorium formula and not by scrapping it. We are confident that, if the United States stands firm and if the free nations work in greater solidarity among themselves and in closer collaboration with us, the moratorium formula could still receive the simple majority support. In recent months, we have repeatedly made this view of ours known to the U.S. Government and to other friendly governments concerned and have requested their active support. The U.S. Government has been studying this problem and has not yet decided on any specific plan.
III
According to a report carried by the Chicago Sun-Times on June 23, the U.S. Secretary of State was alleged to have informed the Japanese Foreign Minister during Prime Minister Ikeda's visit to Washington that the United States was considering a new formula based on the so-called "successor-states" theory or the so-called "two Chinas" theory. Such a formula would have China's seat in the United Nations divided into two-one to be held by the Republic of China both in the Security Council and in the General Assembly, and the other to be given to the Chinese Communist regime in the General Assembly. As the Peiping regime would certainly refuse to enter the United Nations under such an arrangement, so the theory goes, the twin purpose of preserving our membership and preventing the Communist regime's admission could still be achieved.
On the same day, the spokesman of the U. S. Department of State reportedly declared that he was not in a position to discuss the conversations between the Japanese Foreign Minister and the Secretary of State and that the United States had been studying all possible measures and no decision had been reached as yet. At his press conference on June 27, Secretary Rusk also indicated that the U.S. Government had not yet decided upon a definite plan to be employed for preventing the admission of the Chinese Communist regime into the United Nations. It may be pointed out that while it has informed the Chinese Government on various occasions of its doubts as to whether the moratorium formula could continue to be effectively used, the U. S. Government itself has not formally proposed any alternative formula that is designed to carry out the "two Chinas" theory or the "successor-states" theory.
In certain quarters in the United States, however, voices have been raised in favor of the "two Chinas" concept which argues for permitting application for U.N. membership by the Chinese Communist regime as long as the seat of the Republic of China is retained. Such voices of compromise and appeasement have caused great confusion, hurt the position of the Republic of China and undermined the confidence of the anti-Communist Asian countries in the leadership of the United States. They are capable of consequences of the gravest nature. The Chinese Government has, through various channels, called the attention of the United States Government to this development which must be arrested in the interest of the common cause against world Communism.
IV
That we are unequivocably opposed to the "two Chinas" theory has been made clear in public statements at various times. Any arrangement that is purported to solve the question of China's representation in the United Nations on the basis of "two Chinas" can not be accepted, nor tolerated, by the Republic of China.
The Chinese Communist regime is a puppet created by Soviet Russia and a product of Russian aggression against China. Not only has it never been accepted by the Chinese people, their active resistance against it has never ceased. By imposing a despotic rule, which destroys human rights within the country and by engaging itself in aggression abroad with the United Nations as its enemy, the puppet regime cannot conceivably be said to qualify as a representative of the Chinese people under any circumstances. On the other hand, the Government of the Republic of China is, legally constituted in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of China which was adopted by the National Assembly freely elected by the people of the entire country. As such, it is the only government that legitimately represents the Chinese nation. Though it has its temporary seat in the Taiwan Province at the present moment, it has nevertheless the wholehearted support of all Chinese people, including those residing overseas and those on the Chinese mainland awaiting their deliverance from the Chinese Communist tyranny. Its rightful place in the United Nations as the only representative of the whole of China cannot be questioned.
The so-called "successor-states" theory not only is against the wishes of the Chinese people, but also violates the letter and spirit of the United Nations Charter. Article II, paragraph 7 of the Charter provides that "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." How can the U.N. General Assembly then take upon itself to divide a member state into two without regard to the wishes of the government and people of the country concerned? As Article IV of the Charter specifically sets forth the conditions and procedures for admission of new members, how can the U.N. General Assembly arrange other manners of admitting new members in contravention of the provisions of the Charter? This theory, if permitted to prevail, would constitute an important retreat from principles by the free nations and would set a fatal precedent. China would not be the only victim. The position of the United Nations itself would be so damaged that a repetition of the history of the defunct League of Nations would become inevitable.
V
The United Nations is one of the cornerstones of our foreign policy. However difficult our international environment may become, our Government is resolved to do its utmost with every possible means to ensure our right of representation in the United Nations and to prevent the puppet Communist regime from gaining entry into that world body. In thus defending our own legitimate position, we would also be safeguarding the dignity of the United Nations itself. The integrity of the sovereignty which rests in our government, as the constitutional government of China, over the Chinese mainland and Taiwan does not permit the integrity of representation in the United Nations to be impaired in any manner. We call upon the people of those countries which are our friends and allies to respect our honorable stand and to uphold the purposes and principles of the Charter upon which the United Nations is built. We call upon them not to yield to expediency, which would help their foe and harm their friend; nor to attempt to force upon us any arrangement, which would impair our sovereignty and must therefore be rejected by us in consideration of our basic national policy and our interest of the most vital nature. As the question of China's representation in the United Nations involves also the dignity of the U.N. Charter and the very future of the United Nations, our friends and allies must be warned not to indulge in dubious tactical maneuverings at the expense of basic principles.
The long-range interests of the free world as a whole and of free Asia in particular lies in a free, democratic and unified China delivered from under the Communist tyranny. This is the common goal of all Chinese people and the sacred responsibility of the Chinese Government. It is our fervent hope that our friends and allies will support us in this difficult task, instead of unwittingly perpetuating a divided China, which could not but bring unending woes to the entire free world.
*Statement by H. E. Shen Chang-huan, minister of foreign affairs, on the question of China's representation in the United Nations, at the 30th Plenary Meeting of the 27th Session of the Legislative Yuan on June 30, 1961.
THE OUTER MONGOLIAN ISSUE*
I
Using the question of U.N. membership for Outer Mongolia as a pretext, the Soviet Union has been obstructing the admission of Mauritania in an attempt to stir up resentment against the Republic of China on the part of French-speaking nations in Africa. At this juncture, the United States chooses to discuss with Outer Mongolia the establishment of diplomatic relations. This has further complicated the issue as the problem of Outer Mongolia touches on our vital interests; the Chinese Government and people cannot but view this development with deep concern. In the following I wish to report to you some of the important aspects of this problem.
II
For more than a decade, the Soviet Union has repeatedly attempted to blackmail the United Nations into "package deals" in the matter of admission of new members, particularly for the purpose of gaining admission for Outer Mongolia. This tactics reached its climax in December 1955. At the time, despite the difficult circumstances resulting from pressures from various sources, the Chinese Government vetoed Outer Mongolia's application, thereby defeating the Soviet intrigue, upholding the principle of international justice, and keeping intact the dignity of the U.N. Charter. Only when it was thus foiled in its diabolical design did the Soviet Union agree to the entry of thirteen nations in Western Europe, Asia and Africa and also of Japan to the world body one after another. This display of a just and firm position on the part of the Republic of China and of its determination to uphold the U.N. Charter eventually won the praise and respect of free nations and peoples all over the world.
III
When Mauritania's application for admission was brought before the Security Council last December, the Soviet Union resorted to its old tactics again and proposed the admission of Outer Mongolia as a condition. Mauritania's application was supported by the Republic of China and seven other member-states on the Security Council. Outer Mongolia's application, however, failed to receive approval for inscription. In utter disregard of world opinion, the Soviet Union vetoed Mauritania's application for membership.
Last April when the second part of the 15th session of the U.N. General Assembly was discussing the draft resolution on the qualifications of Mauritania for U.N. membership, the Soviet Union proposed a number of amendments to include the matter of admission of Outer Mongolia. The French-speaking nations of Africa, understandably anxious to see Mauritania admitted as a member of the United Nations, were afraid that the Soviet Union would again use Outer Mongolia as a pretext for vetoing Mauritania. This and the tendency to appease the Soviet Union on the part of a number of non-Communist nations made it possible for the Soviet amendments to be partly adopted.
Since then, Mauritania has cabled the Secretary-General of the United Nations, requesting reconsideration by the Security Council of her application for membership. The Soviet Union also wrote last month to the President of the Security Council, asking that Outer Mongolia's application be included in the agenda for the next Council session when it discusses new applications for membership.
All of the French-speaking nations of Africa are deeply concerned over the admission of Mauritania. Some of them have individually conveyed to us this wish of theirs and expressed the hope that we would not exercise our veto power over Outer Mongolia's application for membership, so as to deny the Soviet Union of any pretext to veto the admission of Mauritania. At the same time, Morocco and her friends are opposed to the independence of Mauritania and to the latter's admission to the United Nations. Thus, the Soviet Union is, on the one hand, currying the favor of Morocco and certain other nations opposing Mauritania's admission by blocking the entry of Mauritania to the world body, and, on the other hand, seeking to ease any unfavorable reaction on the part of the French-speaking nations by proposing again the admission of Outer Mongolia as a bargaining condition in disregard of Charter provisions. In this way, the Soviet Union attempts to shift onto the Republic of China any blame for Mauritania's failure to gain admission to the U.N.
IV
In April, the U.S. Government disclosed to us that it was considering the possibility of establishing diplomatic relations with Outer Mongolia. When the second part of the 15th session of the General Assembly was reviewing Outer Mongolia's application for membership, the U.S. delegation declared that, if Outer Mongolia could prove that it is an independent state and is able to discharge its international obligations, the United States would be in favor of its admission. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has since made repeated representations to the U.S. Government to voice the Chinese Government's strong opposition and called on the U.S. Government to give the matter its careful consideration in view of the most undesirable consequences of the proposed action.
Just prior to its first contact with Outer Mongolia on June 2, the United States Government notified the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the steps it was going to take. Both in writing and orally, the Ministry reiterated the Chinese Government's strong opposition to the move and urged the U.S. Government to refrain from further action pending consultation.
On June 8, the U.S. State Department announced that the American charge d'affaires had begun his contact with the "Ambassador of Outer Mongolia" in Moscow in order to determine whether Outer Mongolia has the attributes of an independent and sovereign state. On June 9 the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement, which was published in the press.
While the purpose of such contact with Outer Mongolia as announced by the U.S. State Department appears merely to determine whether Outer Mongolia has the attributes of an independent and sovereign state, the scope of discussion will inevitably include the questions of diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Outer Mongolia and of the latter's admission to the United Nations. This move on the part of the United States has made more difficult our efforts to bar the entry of Outer Mongolia to the United Nations and our handling of the question of Outer Mongolia's future status. As a move detrimental to the vital interests of China, it is strongly resented by the Chinese people. Furthermore, in the eyes of all free nations, the move in question by the United States, which cannot be satisfactorily rationalized, obviously represents a major retreat from principles, as it recognizes the fruits of aggression, boots the prestige of the aggressor and helps the enemy at the expense of friends. In the end, it will only arouse serious doubts in the minds of all anti-Communist nations in Asia and other parts of the world regarding the United States basic policy and her ability to distinguish friend from foe. The effect on the whole free world cannot but be undesirable.
We hope that the United States Government will fully recognize the seriousness of this matter and will carefully take into consideration the consequences of this move. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is keeping in close contact with the U.S. Government on this matter.
V
Outer Mongolia is a puppet regime through and through, without any attributes of an independent and sovereign state. The original proclamation of its independence was a result of the secret Yalta agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union. The Chinese Government, upon the advice of the U.S. Government, signed the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Alliance of 1945. Under an exchange of notes annexed to the said Treaty, the Soviet Union undertook to respect the independence of Outer Mongolia. However, later events proved that the Soviet Union violated every provision of that treaty, including its undertaking to respect Outer Mongolia's independence. Since 1945, the Soviet Union has never relaxed its control over Outer Mongolia whose true status is by no means different from any of the component republics of the Soviet Union. In the Peitashan incident of 1947, the armed forces of Outer Mongolia invaded Sinkiang at the behest of the Soviet Union. In the Korean War, Outer Mongolia, acting on orders of its Soviet master, dispatched its troops to Korea. Together with the Chinese and Korean Communists, they committed aggression and fought against the United Nations forces. All this testifies to the fact that Outer Mongolia not only has never been an independent country, but is in reality a Soviet tool for aggression. The Chinese Government brought formal charges before the United Nations against the Soviet Union for violations of the Sino-Soviet Treaty. The U.N. General Assembly, in its resolution adopted on February 1, 1952, confirmed the Soviet Union's violations of the said treaty. Subsequently, the Chinese Government formally abrogated that treaty on February 23, 1953.
For the United Nations to admit Outer Mongolia, which is devoid of attributes of an independent and sovereign state and has committed aggression, would be patently in violation of the provisions of the United Nations Charter.
Both in the U.N. General Assembly and the Security Council, the Chinese Government will continue to carry out its consistent and firm policy against any "package deal" designed for extortion on the question of admission of any new member. For any "package deal" is clearly in contravention of the provisions of Article IV of the UN. Charter and does not conform to the advisory opinion rendered by the International Court of Justice on May 28, 1948. If adopted, it would seriously injure the dignity and position of the United Nations. As a founding member of the United Nations and one of its most faithful supporters, the Republic of China must, at this crucial time, continue to strive for the preservation of the sanctity of the U.N. Charter to the very end.
VI
The Chinese Government will remain firm on its stand and will do everything possible to bar Outer Mongolia's admission to the United Nations. Furthermore, it will continue to treat the applications for membership by Mauritania and Outer Mongolia as two separate issues in accordance with the provisions in the U.N. Charter concerning the admission of new members into the world body. Mauritania is a new free nation of Africa. There is not the slightest doubt regarding her independent status and her qualifications for U.N. membership. That is why we have established diplomatic relations with that country. Regarding her application for U.N. membership, we shall continue to give her our full support as we have before. We are opposed to the U.N. membership for Outer Mongolia only; our opposition is not directed against Mauritania. If the Soviet Union should veto the admission of Mauritania again on the pretext of the Outer Mongolia question, it would be the Soviet Union that has to bear full responsibility, in which we shall have no share whatsoever. In seeking solution to this impasse which has been created single-handed by the Soviet Union, all free nations, be they in Africa or other parts of the world, should trace the trouble to its source and act in concert to demand the Soviet Union to give up such base and shameless tactics of extortion and to observe the provisions of the U.N. Charter in dealing with questions of admission of new members to the United Nations.
The Chinese Government is determined to use every means permissible under the U.N. Charter to counter the Soviet Union's intrigue to smuggle Outer Mongolia into the world body, just as it did six years ago, without hesitation and alone if necessary.
It is our hope that people in all free nations will fully appreciate this just and legitimate stand of ours. Any attempt by any country or countries, in disregard of the U.N. Charter, to take advantage of the question of U.N. membership for Mauritania or other matters, to force us to sacrifice principles and abandon our stand on Outer Mongolia, would be an act in violation of both international ethics and the U.N. Charter. It would serve to set a bad precedent of placing force and selfish interest above law. When the very purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter are discarded, the organization for the preservation of world peace and order would have come completely under the control and at the mercy of the Soviet Union. If the United Nations loses its moral authority, all nations, including those which counsel sacrificing of principles in order to placate the Soviet Union into supporting Mauritania's admission, would eventually find their own immediate interest unprotected when such protection is needed. For the sake of the future of the United Nations and for the sake of the interest and security of all U.N. member nations, let us hope that all member nations supporting the U.N. Charter will show wisdom and vision and face up to this fact of grave import.
* The translated version of Foreign Minister Shen Chang-huan’s report on the question of Outer Mongolia before the plenary session of the Legislative Yuan on June 16, 1961.