China issues white paper on Taiwan’s “separatists”

After several days of Chinese military maneuvers around Taiwan, the People’s Republic of China through its embassy in The Hague has circulated a new white paper issued by the government making clear its policy on Taiwan. The white paper was issued by the Taiwan Affairs Office of the Chinese State Council and defines how Beijing plans to take over the island through economic incentives and military pressure. Prior to this, China issued a white paper on Taiwan in 2000.

Here we publish the complete document for the knowledge of our readers as we consider it of utmost importance.

The Taiwan Question and China’s Reunification in the New Era

By The Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council and The State Council Information Office

Resolving the Taiwan question and realizing China’s complete reunification is a shared aspiration of all the sons and daughters of the Chinese nation. It is indispensable for the realization of China’s rejuvenation. It is also a historic mission of the Communist Party of China (CPC). The CPC, the Chinese government, and the Chinese people have striven for decades to achieve this goal.

The 18th National Congress of the CPC in 2012 heralded a new era in building socialism with Chinese characteristics. Under the strong leadership of the CPC Central Committee with Xi Jinping at the core, the CPC and the Chinese government have adopted new and innovative measures in relation to Taiwan. They have continued to chart the course of cross-Straits relations, safeguard peace and stability across the Taiwan Straits, and promote progress towards national reunification. However, in recent years the Taiwan authorities, led by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), have redoubled their efforts to divide the country, and some external forces have tried to exploit Taiwan to contain China, prevent the Chinese nation from achieving complete reunification, and halt the process of national rejuvenation.

The CPC has united the Chinese people and led them in fulfilling the First Centenary Goal of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects as scheduled, and in embarking on a new journey towards the Second Centenary Goal of building China into a modern socialist country.

The Chinese nation has achieved a historic transformation from standing upright to becoming prosperous and growing in strength, and national rejuvenation is driven by an unstoppable force. This marks a new starting point for reunification.

The Chinese government has published two previous white papers on Taiwan. One was The Taiwan Question and Reunification of China in August 1993, and the other was The One-China Principle and the Taiwan Issue in February 2000. These two white papers provided a comprehensive and systematic elaboration of the basic principles and policies regarding the resolution of the Taiwan question. This new white paper is being released to reiterate the fact that Taiwan is part of China, to demonstrate the resolve of the CPC and the Chinese people and their commitment to national reunification, and to emphasize the position and policies of the CPC and the Chinese government in the new era.

Taiwan is Part of China

Taiwan has belonged to China since ancient times. This statement has a sound basis in history and jurisprudence. New archeological discoveries and research findings regularly attest to the profound historical and cultural ties between the two sides of the Taiwan Straits. A large number of historical records and annals document the development of Taiwan by the Chinese people in earlier periods.

The earliest references to this effect are to be found, among others, in Seaboard Geographic Gazetteer compiled in the year 230 by Shen Ying of the State of Wu during the Three Kingdoms Period. The royal court of the Sui Dynasty had on three occasions sent troops to Taiwan, called Liuqiu at that time. Starting from the Song and Yuan dynasties, the imperial central governments of China all set up administrative bodies to exercise jurisdiction over Penghu and Taiwan.

In 1624, Dutch colonialists invaded and occupied the southern part of Taiwan. In 1662, General Zheng Chenggong, hailed as a national hero, led an expedition and expelled them from the island. Subsequently, the Qing court gradually set up more administrative bodies in Taiwan. In 1684, a Taiwan prefecture administration was set up under the jurisdiction of Fujian Province. In 1885, Taiwan’s status was upgraded and it became the 20th province of China.

In July 1894, Japan launched a war of aggression against China. In April 1895, the defeated Qing government was forced to cede Taiwan and the Penghu Islands to Japan. During the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression (1931-1945), China’s Communists called for the recovery of Taiwan. Talking with American journalist Nym Wales on May 15, 1937, Mao Zedong said that China’s goal was to achieve a final victory in the war – a victory that would recover the occupied Chinese territories in Northeast China and to the south of the Shanhai Pass, and secure the liberation of Taiwan.

On December 9, 1941, the Chinese government issued a declaration of war against Japan, and proclaimed that all treaties, conventions, agreements, and contracts regarding relations between China and Japan had been abrogated, and that China would recover Taiwan and the Penghu Islands.

The Cairo Declaration issued by China, the United States and the United Kingdom on December 1, 1943 stated that it was the purpose of the three allies that all the territories Japan had stolen from China, such as Northeast China, Taiwan and the Penghu Islands, should be restored to China.

The Potsdam Proclamation was signed by China, the United States and the United Kingdom on July 26, 1945, and subsequently recognized by the Soviet Union. It reiterated: “The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out.” In September of the same year, Japan signed the instrument of surrender, in which it promised that it would faithfully fulfill the obligations laid down in the Potsdam Proclamation. On October 25 the Chinese government announced that it was resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Taiwan, and the ceremony to accept Japan’s surrender in Taiwan Province of the China war theater of the Allied powers was held in Taibei (Taipei). From that point forward, China had recovered Taiwan de jure and de facto through a host of documents with international legal effect.

On October 1, 1949, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was founded, becoming the successor to the Republic of China (1912-1949), and the Central People’s Government became the only legitimate government of the whole of China. The new government replaced the previous KMT regime in a situation where China, as a subject under international law, did not change and China’s sovereignty and inherent territory did not change. As a natural result, the government of the PRC should enjoy and exercise China’s full sovereignty, which includes its sovereignty over Taiwan.

As a result of the civil war in China in the late 1940s and the interference of external forces, the two sides of the Taiwan Straits have fallen into a state of protracted political confrontation. But the sovereignty and territory of China have never been divided and will never be divided, and Taiwan’s status as part of China’s territory has never changed and will never be allowed to change.

At its 26th session in October 1971, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 2758, which undertook “to restore all its rights to the People’s Republic of China and to recognize the representatives of its Government as the only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations, and to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the United Nations and in all the organizations related to it”. This resolution settled once and for all the political, legal and procedural issues of China’s representation in the UN, and it covered the whole country, including Taiwan. It also spelled out that China has one single seat in the UN, so there is no such thing as “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan”.

The specialized agencies of the UN later adopted further resolutions restoring to the PRC its lawful seat and expelling the representatives of the Taiwan authorities. One of these is Resolution 25.1 adopted at the 25th World Health Assembly in May 1972. It was clearly stated in the official legal opinions of the Office of Legal Affairs of the UN Secretariat that “the United Nations considers ‘Taiwan’ as a province of China with no separate status”, and the “‘authorities’ in ‘Taipei’ are not considered to… enjoy any form of government status”. At the UN the island is referred to as “Taiwan, Province of China”[1].

Resolution 2758 is a political document encapsulating the one-China principle whose legal authority leaves no room for doubt and has been acknowledged worldwide. Taiwan does not have any ground, reason, or right to join the UN, or any other international organization whose membership is confined to sovereign states.

In recent years some elements in a small number of countries, the US foremost among them, have colluded with forces in Taiwan, to falsely claim that the resolution did not conclusively resolve the issue of Taiwan’s representation. Puffing up the illegal and invalid Treaty of San Francisco[2] and disregarding the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation and other international legal documents, they profess that the status of Taiwan has yet to be determined, and declare their support for “Taiwan’s meaningful participation in the UN system”. What they are actually attempting to do is to alter Taiwan’s status as part of China and create “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan” as part of a political ploy – using Taiwan to contain China. These actions in violation of Resolution 2758 and international law are a serious breach of political commitments made by these countries. They damage China’s sovereignty and dignity, and treat the basic principles of international law with contempt. The Chinese government has condemned and expressed its resolute opposition to them.

The one-China principle represents the universal consensus of the international community; it is consistent with the basic norms of international relations. To date, 181 countries including the United States have established diplomatic relations with the PRC on the basis of the one-China principle. The China-US Joint Communique on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations, published in December 1978, states: “The Government of the United States of America acknowledges the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China.” It also states: “The United States of America recognizes the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal Government of China. Within this context, the people of the United States will maintain cultural, commercial, and other unofficial relations with the people of Taiwan.”

The Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, adopted at the Fifth Session of the Fifth National People’s Congress (NPC) in December 1982, stipulates: “Taiwan is part of the sacred territory of the People’s Republic of China. It is the inviolable duty of all Chinese people, including our compatriots in Taiwan, to accomplish the great task of reunifying the motherland.”

The Anti-Secession Law, adopted at the Third Session of the 10th NPC in March 2005, stipulates: “There is only one China in the world. Both the mainland and Taiwan belong to one China. China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity brook no division. Safeguarding China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is the common obligation of all Chinese people, the Taiwan compatriots included. Taiwan is part of China. The state shall never allow the ‘Taiwan independence’ secessionist forces to make Taiwan secede from China under any name or by any means.”

The National Security Law, adopted at the 15th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 12th NPC in July 2015, stipulates: “The sovereignty and territorial integrity of China brook no violation or separation. Safeguarding national sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity is the common duty of all Chinese citizens, including Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan compatriots.”

We are one China, and Taiwan is part of China. This is an indisputable fact supported by history and the law. Taiwan has never been a state; its status as part of China is unalterable. Any attempt to distort these facts and dispute or deny the one-China principle will end in failure.

Resolute Efforts of the CPC to Realize China’s Complete Reunification

The CPC has always been dedicated to working for the wellbeing of the Chinese people and the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. Soon after its founding in 1921, the CPC set itself the goal of freeing Taiwan from colonial rule, reuniting it with the rest of the country and liberating the whole nation, including compatriots in Taiwan. It has made a tremendous effort to achieve this goal.

The CPC is committed to the historic mission of resolving the Taiwan question and realizing China’s complete reunification. Under its resolute leadership, people on both sides of the Taiwan Straits have worked together to de-escalate tension across the Straits. They have set out on a path of peaceful development and made many breakthroughs in improving cross-Straits relations.

After the founding of the PRC in 1949, China’s Communists, under the leadership of Mao Zedong, proposed the essential guideline, underlying principle, and basic policy for peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question. The CPC prepared and worked for the liberation of Taiwan, thwarted the Taiwan authorities’ plans to attack the mainland, and foiled attempts to create “two Chinas” and “one China, one Taiwan”. Through their efforts, the lawful seat and rights of the PRC in the United Nations were restored and the one-China principle was subscribed to by the majority of countries, laying important groundwork for peaceful reunification. The CPC central leadership established high-level contact with the Taiwan authorities through proper channels in pursuit of a peaceful solution to the Taiwan question.

Following the Third Plenary Session of the 11th CPC Central Committee in 1978, with the establishment of diplomatic relations between the PRC and the United States, China’s Communists, led by Deng Xiaoping, defined the fundamental guideline for peaceful reunification in the vital interests of the country and the people and on the basis of the consensus for peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question. The CPC introduced the creative and well-conceived concept of One Country, Two Systems, and applied it first in resolving the questions of Hong Kong and Macao. It took action to ease military confrontation across the Taiwan Straits, restore contact, and open up people-to-people exchanges and cooperation, opening a new chapter in cross-Straits relations.

After the Fourth Plenary Session of the 13th CPC Central Committee in 1989, China’s Communists, led by Jiang Zemin, made eight proposals for the development of cross-Straits relations and the peaceful reunification of China[3]. The CPC facilitated agreement across the Straits on the 1992 Consensus, which embodies the one-China principle. It initiated cross-Straits consultations and negotiations, resulting in the first talks between heads of the non-governmental organizations authorized by the two sides of the Straits, and expanded cross-Straits exchanges and cooperation in various fields. The CPC took firm action against separatist activities led by Lee Teng-hui, and struck hard at the separatist forces seeking “Taiwan independence”. It ensured the smooth return of Hong Kong and Macao to China, and applied the policy of One Country, Two Systems, which had a constructive impact on the settlement of the Taiwan question.

After the 16th CPC National Congress in 2002, China’s Communists, led by Hu Jintao, highlighted the importance of peaceful development of cross-Straits relations. The CPC pushed for the enactment of the Anti-Secession Law to curb separatist activities in Taiwan, hosted the first talks between the leaders of the CPC and the Kuomintang in six decades since 1945, and defeated attempts by Chen Shui-bian to fabricate a legal basis for “independence”. The CPC effected profound changes in moving the peaceful development of cross-Straits relations forward by promoting institutionalized consultations and negotiations that produced fruitful results, establishing overall direct two-way links in mail, business and transport, and facilitating the signing and implementation of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement.

After the 18th CPC National Congress in 2012, China’s Communists, under the leadership of Xi Jinping, took a holistic approach to cross-Straits relations in keeping with changing circumstances, added substance to the theory on national reunification and the principles and policies concerning Taiwan, and worked to keep cross-Straits relations on the right track. The CPC developed its overall policy for resolving the Taiwan question in the new era, and set out the overarching guideline and a program of action.

At its 19th National Congress in October 2017, the CPC affirmed the basic policy of upholding One Country, Two Systems and promoting national reunification, and emphasized its resolve never to allow any person, any organization, or any political party, at any time or in any form, to separate any part of Chinese territory from China.

In January 2019, Xi Jinping, general secretary of the CPC Central Committee and president of China, addressed a meeting marking the 40th anniversary of the release of the Message to Compatriots in Taiwan. In his speech, Xi Jinping proposed major policies to advance the peaceful development of cross-Straits relations and the peaceful reunification of China in the new era. These are: first, working together to promote China’s rejuvenation and its peaceful reunification; second, seeking a Two Systems solution to the Taiwan question and making innovative efforts towards peaceful reunification; third, abiding by the one-China principle and safeguarding the prospects for peaceful reunification; fourth, further integrating development across the Straits and consolidating the foundations for peaceful reunification; fifth, forging closer bonds of heart and mind between people on both sides of the Straits and strengthening joint commitment to peaceful reunification.

The CPC and the Chinese government have thereby adopted a series of major measures for charting the course of cross-Straits relations and realizing China’s peaceful reunification:

– The CPC and the Chinese government have facilitated the first meeting and direct dialogue between leaders of the two sides since 1949, raising exchanges and interactions to new heights, opening up a new chapter, and creating new space for cross-Straits relations. This is a new milestone. The departments in charge of cross-Straits affairs on both sides have established regular contact and communication mechanisms on a common political foundation, and the heads of the two departments have exchanged visits and set up hotlines.

– Upholding the one-China principle and the 1992 Consensus, the CPC and the Chinese government have facilitated exchanges between political parties across the Straits, and conducted dialogues, consultations, and in-depth exchanges of views on cross-Straits relations and the future of the Chinese nation with relevant political parties, organizations, and individuals in Taiwan. These efforts have resulted in consensus on multiple issues, and promoted a number of joint initiatives exploring the Two Systems solution to the Taiwan question with all sectors of Taiwan society.

– Guided by the conviction that people on both sides of the Taiwan Straits are of the same family, the CPC and the Chinese government have promoted peaceful development of cross-Straits relations and integrated development of the two sides for the benefit of both the mainland and Taiwan. We have also refined the institutional arrangements, policies and measures to promote cross-Straits exchanges and cooperation, designed to advance the wellbeing of the people of Taiwan. These include the delivery of water from the coastal province of Fujian to Kinmen Island, electronic travel passes for Taiwan residents to enter or leave the mainland, residence permits for Taiwan residents, progressively ensuring that Taiwan compatriots have equal access to public services so as to facilitate their studying, starting businesses, working and living on the mainland, and an ongoing effort to pave the way for Taiwan to benefit first from the mainland’s development opportunities.

– While countering interference and obstruction from separatist forces, the CPC and the Chinese government have called on the people of Taiwan to promote effective and in-depth cooperation and people-to-people exchanges in various fields across the Straits. Having overcome the impact of COVID-19, we have held a number of exchange events such as the Straits Forum, and maintained the momentum of cross-Straits exchanges and cooperation.

– Resolute in defending state sovereignty and territorial integrity and opposing separatist activities and external interference, the CPC and the Chinese government have safeguarded peace and stability in the Taiwan Straits and the fundamental interests of the Chinese nation. We have taken lawful action against and effectively deterred separatist forces. We have handled Taiwan’s external exchanges in a sound manner, and consolidated the international community’s commitment to the one-China principle.

Under the guidance of the CPC, great progress has been made in cross-Straits relations over the past seven decades, especially since the estrangement between the two sides was ended. Increased exchanges, broader cooperation and closer interactions have brought tangible benefits to people across the Straits, especially of Taiwan. This fully demonstrates that cross-Straits amity and cooperation are mutually beneficial.

The volume of cross-Straits trade was only US$46 million in 1978. It rose to US$328.34 billion in 2021, up by a factor of more than 7,000. The mainland has been Taiwan’s largest export market for the last 21 years, generating a large annual surplus for the island. The mainland is also the largest destination for Taiwan’s off-island investment. By the end of 2021 Taiwan businesses had invested in almost 124,000 projects on the mainland, to a total value of US$71.34 billion[4].

In 1987 less than 50,000 visits were made between the two sides; by 2019 this number had soared to about 9 million. In the past three years, affected by COVID-19, online communication has become the main form of people-to-people interactions across the Straits, and the numbers of people participating in and covered by online communication are reaching new highs.

The CPC has always been the spine of the Chinese nation, exercising strong leadership in realizing national rejuvenation and reunification. Its consistent efforts over the decades to resolve the Taiwan question and achieve complete national reunification are based on the following:

First, the one-China principle must be upheld, and no individual or force should be allowed to separate Taiwan from China.

Second, it is imperative to strive for the wellbeing of all Chinese people, including those in Taiwan, and to realize the aspirations of all Chinese people for a better life.

Third, we must follow the principles of freeing the mind, seeking truth from facts, maintaining the right political orientation, and breaking new ground, and defend the fundamental interests of the nation and the core interests of the state in formulating principles and policies on work related to Taiwan.

Fourth, it is necessary to have the courage and skill to fight against any force that attempts to undermine China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity or stands in the way of its reunification.

Fifth, extensive unity and solidarity must be upheld to mobilize all factors to fight against any force that would divide the country, and pool strengths to advance national reunification.

China’s Complete Reunification is a Process that Cannot be Halted

Against a backdrop of profound and complex changes in the domestic and international situation, our cause of complete national reunification is facing new challenges. The CPC and the Chinese government have the strength and the confidence to deal with complexities and overcome risks and threats, and the ability to take great strides forward on the path to national reunification.

1. Complete Reunification is Critical to National Rejuvenation

Throughout China’s 5,000-year history, national reunification and opposition to division have remained a common ideal and a shared tradition of the whole nation. In the modern era from the mid-19th century, due to the aggression of Western powers and the decadence of feudal rule, China was gradually reduced to a semi-feudal, semi-colonial society, and went through a period of suffering worse than anything it had previously known. The country endured intense humiliation, the people were subjected to great pain, and the Chinese civilization was plunged into darkness. Japan’s 50-year occupation of Taiwan epitomized this humiliation and inflicted agony on both sides of the Taiwan Straits. Our two sides face each other just across a strip of water, yet we are still far apart. The fact that we have not yet been reunified is a scar left by history on the Chinese nation. We Chinese on both sides should work together to achieve reunification and heal this wound.

National rejuvenation has been the greatest dream of the Chinese people and the Chinese nation since the modern era began. Only by realizing complete national reunification can the Chinese people on both sides of the Straits cast aside the shadow of civil war and create and enjoy lasting peace. National reunification is the only way to avoid the risk of Taiwan being invaded and occupied again by foreign countries, to foil the attempts of external forces to contain China, and to safeguard the sovereignty, security, and development interests of our country. It is the most effective remedy to secessionist attempts to divide our country, and the best means to consolidate Taiwan’s status as part of China and advance national rejuvenation. It will enable us to pool the strengths of the people on both sides, build our common home, safeguard our interests and wellbeing, and create a brighter future for the Chinese people and the Chinese nation. As Dr Sun Yat-sen, the great pioneer of China’s revolution, once said, “Unification is the hope of all Chinese nationals. If China can be unified, all Chinese will enjoy a happy life; if it cannot, all will suffer.”

In exploring the path to rejuvenation and prosperity, China has endured vicissitudes and hardships. “Unification brings strength while division leads to chaos.” This is a law of history. The realization of complete national reunification is driven by the history and culture of the Chinese nation and determined by the momentum towards and circumstances surrounding our national rejuvenation. Never before have we been so close to, confident in, and capable of achieving the goal of national rejuvenation. The same is true when it comes to our goal of complete national reunification. The Taiwan question arose as a result of weakness and chaos in our nation, and it will be resolved as national rejuvenation becomes a reality. When all the Chinese people stick together and work together, we will surely succeed in realizing national reunification on our way to national rejuvenation.

2. National Development and Progress Set the Direction of Cross-Straits Relations

China’s development and progress are a key factor determining the course of cross-Straits relations and the realization of complete national reunification. In particular, the great achievements over four decades of reform, opening up and modernization have had a profound impact on the historical process of resolving the Taiwan question and realizing complete national reunification. No matter which political party or group is in power in Taiwan, it cannot alter the course of progress in cross-Straits relations or the trend towards national reunification.

International Monetary Fund statistics show that in 1980 the GDP of the mainland was about US$303 billion, just over 7 times that of Taiwan, which was about US$42.3 billion; in 2021, the GDP of the mainland was about US$17.46 trillion, more than 22 times that of Taiwan, which was about US$790 billion.[5]

China’s development and progress, and in particular the steady increases in its economic power, technological strength, and national defense capabilities, are an effective curb against separatist activities and interference from external forces. They also provide broad space and great opportunities for cross-Straits exchanges and cooperation. As more and more compatriots from Taiwan, especially young people, pursue their studies, start businesses, seek jobs, or go to live on the mainland, cross-Straits exchanges, interaction and integration are intensified in all sectors, the economic ties and personal bonds between the people on both sides run deeper, and our common cultural and national identities grow stronger, leading cross-Straits relations towards reunification.

The CPC has united the Chinese people and led them in embarking on the new journey of building China into a modern socialist country in all respects. Following the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the mainland has improved its governance and maintained long-term economic growth; it enjoys a solid material foundation, a wealth of human resources, a huge market, strong resilience in development, and social stability. It therefore has many strengths and favorable conditions for further development, and these have become the driving force for reunification.

Grounding its effort in the new development stage, the mainland is committed to applying the new development philosophy, creating a new development dynamic, and promoting high-quality development. As a result, the overall strength and international influence of the mainland will continue to increase, and its influence over and appeal to Taiwan society will keep growing. We will have a more solid foundation for resolving the Taiwan question and greater ability to do so. This will give a significant boost to national reunification.

3. Any Attempt by Separatist Forces to Prevent Reunification is Bound to Fail

Taiwan has been an integral part of China’s territory since ancient times. Moves to separate Taiwan from China represent the serious crime of secession, and undermine the common interests of compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Straits and the fundamental interests of the Chinese nation. They will lead nowhere.

The DPP authorities have adopted a separatist stance, and colluded with external forces in successive provocative actions designed to divide the country. They refuse to recognize the one-China principle, and distort and deny the 1992 Consensus. They assert that Taiwan and the mainland should not be subordinate to each other, and proclaim a new “two states” theory. On the island, they constantly press for “de-sinicization” and promote “incremental independence”. They incite radical separatists in and outside the DPP to lobby for amendments to their “constitution” and “laws”. They deceive the people of Taiwan, incite hostility against the mainland, and obstruct and undermine cross-Straits exchanges, cooperation and integrated development. They have steadily built up their military forces with the intention of pursuing “independence” and preventing reunification by force. They join with external forces in trying to sow the seeds of “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan”. The actions of the DPP authorities have resulted in tension in cross-Straits relations, endangering peace and stability in the Taiwan Straits, and undermining the prospects and restricting the space for peaceful reunification. These are obstacles that must be removed in advancing the process of peaceful reunification.

Taiwan belongs to all the Chinese people, including the 23 million Taiwan compatriots. The Chinese people are firm in their resolve and have a deep commitment to safeguarding China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the fundamental interests of the Chinese nation, and this resolve and commitment will frustrate any attempt to divide the country. When Taiwan was invaded by a foreign power more than 100 years ago, China was a poor and weak country. More than 70 years ago, China defeated the invaders and recovered Taiwan. Today, China has grown into the world’s second largest economy. With significant growth in its political, economic, cultural, technological, and military strength, there is no likelihood that China will allow Taiwan to be separated again. Attempts to reject reunification and split the country are doomed, because they will founder against the history and culture of the Chinese nation as well as the resolve and commitment of more than 1.4 billion Chinese people.

4. External Forces Obstructing China’s Complete Reunification will Surely be Defeated

External interference is a prominent obstacle to China’s reunification. Still lost in delusions of hegemony and trapped in a Cold War mindset, some forces in the US insist on perceiving and portraying China as a major strategic adversary and a serious long-term threat. They do their utmost to undermine and pressurize China, exploiting Taiwan as a convenient tool. The US authorities have stated that they remain committed to the one-China policy and that they do not support “Taiwan independence”. But their actions contradict their words. They are clouding the one-China principle in uncertainty and compromising its integrity. They are contriving “official” exchanges with Taiwan, increasing arms sales, and colluding in military provocation. To help Taiwan expand its “international space”, they are inducing other countries to interfere in Taiwan affairs, and concocting Taiwan-related bills that infringe upon the sovereignty of China. They are creating confusion around what is black and white, right and wrong. On the one hand, they incite separatist forces to create tension and turmoil in cross-Straits relations. On the other hand, they accuse the mainland of coercion, pressurizing Taiwan, and unilaterally changing the status quo, in order to embolden these forces and create obstacles to China’s peaceful reunification.

The important principles of respecting state sovereignty and territorial integrity as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations are the cornerstones of modern international law and basic norms of international relations. It is the sacred right of every sovereign state to safeguard national unity and territorial integrity. It goes without saying that the Chinese government is entitled to take all measures necessary to settle the Taiwan question and achieve national reunification, free of external interference.

Behind the smokescreens of “freedom, democracy, and human rights” and “upholding the rules-based international order”, some anti-China forces in the US deliberately distort the nature of the Taiwan question – which is purely an internal matter for China – and try to deny the legitimacy and justification of the Chinese government in safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity. This clearly reveals their intention of using Taiwan to contain China and obstruct China’s reunification, which should be thoroughly exposed and condemned.

These external forces are using Taiwan as a pawn to undermine China’s development and progress, and obstruct the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. They are doing so at the cost of the interests, wellbeing and future of the people of Taiwan rather than for their benefit. They have encouraged and instigated provocative actions by the separatist forces; these have intensified cross-Straits tension and confrontation, and undermined peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. This runs counter to the underlying global trends of peace, development and win-win cooperation, and goes against the wishes of the international community and the aspiration of all peoples.

Shortly after the PRC was founded, even though the country itself had to be rebuilt on the ruins of decades of war, China and its people won a resounding victory in the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea (1950-1953). We defeated a powerful and well-armed enemy through gallantry and tenacity. In doing so, we safeguarded the security of the newly founded People’s Republic, reestablished the status of China as a major country in the world, and demonstrated our heroic spirit, our lack of fear, and our will to stand up against the abuse of the powerful.

China is firmly committed to peaceful development. At the same time, it will not flinch under any external interference, nor will it tolerate any infringement upon its sovereignty, security and development interests. Relying on external forces will achieve nothing for Taiwan’s separatists, and using Taiwan to contain China is doomed to fail.

Tranquility, development and a decent life are the expectations of our Taiwan compatriots, and the common aspiration of those on both sides of the Taiwan Straits. Under the strong leadership of the CPC, the Chinese people and the Chinese nation have stood upright, won prosperity, and grown in strength. A moderately prosperous society in all respects has been built on the mainland, where a large population once lived in dire poverty. We now have better conditions, more confidence, and greater capabilities. We can complete the historic mission of national reunification, so that both sides of the Straits can enjoy a better life. The wheel of history rolls on towards national reunification, and it will not be stopped by any individual or any force.

National Reunification in the New Era

Taking into consideration the overall goal of national rejuvenation in the context of global change on a scale unseen in a century, the CPC and the Chinese government have continued to follow the CPC’s fundamental guidelines on the Taiwan question and implement its principles and policies towards Taiwan, and have made concrete efforts to promote peaceful cross-Straits relations, integrate the development of the two sides, and work towards national reunification.

1. Upholding the Basic Principles of Peaceful Reunification and One Country, Two Systems

National reunification by peaceful means is the first choice of the CPC and the Chinese government in resolving the Taiwan question, as it best serves the interests of the Chinese nation as a whole, including our compatriots in Taiwan, and it works best for the long-term stability and development of China. We have worked hard to overcome hardships and obstacles to peaceful reunification over the past decades, showing that we cherish and safeguard the greater good of the nation, the wellbeing of our compatriots in Taiwan, and peace on both sides.

The One Country, Two Systems principle is an important institutional instrument created by the CPC and the Chinese government to enable peaceful reunification. It represents a great achievement of Chinese socialism. Peaceful reunification and One Country, Two Systems are our basic principles for resolving the Taiwan question and the best approach to realizing national reunification. Embodying the Chinese wisdom – we thrive by embracing each other – they take full account of Taiwan’s realities and are conducive to long-term stability in Taiwan after reunification.

We maintain that after peaceful reunification, Taiwan may continue its current social system and enjoy a high degree of autonomy in accordance with the law. The two social systems will develop side by side for a long time to come. One Country is the precondition and foundation of Two Systems; Two Systems is subordinate to and derives from One Country; and the two are integrated under the one-China principle.

We will continue working with our compatriots in Taiwan to explore a Two Systems solution to the Taiwan question and increase our efforts towards peaceful reunification. In designing the specifics for implementing One Country, Two Systems, we will give full consideration to the realities in Taiwan and the views and proposals from all walks of life on both sides, and fully accommodate the interests and sentiments of our compatriots in Taiwan.

Ever since the One Country, Two Systems principle was proposed, certain political forces have been misrepresenting and distorting its objectives. The DPP and the authorities under its leadership have done everything possible to target the principle with baseless criticisms, and this has led to misunderstandings about its aims in some quarters of Taiwan. It is a fact that since Hong Kong and Macao returned to the motherland and were reincorporated into national governance, they have embarked on a broad path of shared development together with the mainland, and each complements the others’ strengths. The practice of One Country, Two Systems has been a resounding success.

For a time, Hong Kong faced a period of damaging social unrest caused by anti-China agitators both inside and outside the region. Based on a clear understanding of the situation there, the CPC and the Chinese government upheld the One Country, Two Systems principle, made some appropriate improvements, and took a series of measures that addressed both the symptoms and root causes of the unrest. Order was restored and prosperity returned to Hong Kong. This has laid a solid foundation for the law-based governance of Hong Kong and Macao and the long-term continuation of One Country, Two Systems.

To realize peaceful reunification, we must acknowledge that the mainland and Taiwan have their own distinct social systems and ideologies. The One Country, Two Systems principle is the most inclusive solution to this problem. It is an approach that is grounded in democratic principles, demonstrates good will, seeks peaceful resolution of the Taiwan question, and delivers mutual benefit. The differences in social system are neither an obstacle to reunification nor a justification for secessionism. We firmly believe that our compatriots in Taiwan will develop a better understanding of the principle, and that the Two Systems solution to the Taiwan question will play its full role while compatriots on both sides work together towards peaceful reunification.

Peaceful reunification can only be achieved through consultation and discussion as equals. The long-standing political differences between the two sides are the fundamental obstacles to the steady improvement of cross-Straits relations, but we should not allow this problem to be passed down from one generation to the next. We can phase in flexible forms of consultation and discussion. We are ready to engage with all parties, groups, or individuals in Taiwan in a broad exchange of views aimed at resolving the political differences between the two sides based on the one-China principle and the 1992 Consensus. Representatives will be recommended by all political parties and all sectors of society on both sides, and they will engage in democratic consultations on peaceful development of cross-Straits relations, integrated development of the two sides, and the peaceful reunification of our country.

2. Promoting Peaceful Cross-Straits Relations and Integrated Development

Peaceful cross-Straits relations and integrated development pave the way for reunification and serve to benefit our people on both sides. Thus, both sides should work together towards this goal. We will extend integrated development, increase exchanges and cooperation, strengthen bonds, and expand common interests in the peaceful development of cross-Straits relations. In this way, we will all identify more closely with the Chinese culture and Chinese nation, and heighten the sense of our shared future. This lays solid foundations for peaceful reunification.

We will explore an innovative approach to integrated development and take the lead in setting up a pilot zone for integrated cross-Straits development in Fujian Province, advancing integration through better connectivity and more preferential policies, and based on mutual trust and understanding. Both sides should continue to promote connectivity in any area where it is beneficial, including trade and economic cooperation, infrastructure, energy and resources, and industrial standards. We should promote cooperation in culture, education, and health care, and the sharing of social security and public resources. We should support neighboring areas or areas with similar conditions on the two sides in providing equal, universal, and accessible public services. We should take active steps to institutionalize cross-Straits economic cooperation and create a common market for the two sides to strengthen the Chinese economy.

We will improve the systems and policies to guarantee the wellbeing of Taiwan compatriots and ensure that they are treated as equals on the mainland, and we will protect their legitimate rights and interests here in accordance with the law. We will support our fellow Chinese and enterprises from Taiwan in participating in the Belt and Road Initiative, major regional development strategies, and the strategy for coordinated regional development. We will help them integrate into the new development dynamic, participate in high-quality development, share in more development opportunities, and benefit from national socio-economic development.

We will expand cross-Straits exchanges and cooperation in various fields and overcome any obstacles and obstruction. We will encourage our people on both sides to pass on the best of traditional Chinese culture and ensure that it grows in new and creative ways. We will strengthen communication among the general public and the younger generations on both sides, and encourage more fellow Chinese in Taiwan – young people in particular – to pursue studies, start businesses, seek jobs, or live on the mainland. This will help people on both sides to expand mutual understanding, strengthen mutual trust, consolidate a shared sense of identity, and forge closer bonds of heart and mind.

3. Defeating Separatism and External Interference

Separatism will plunge Taiwan into the abyss and bring nothing but disaster to the island. To protect the interests of the Chinese nation as a whole, including our compatriots in Taiwan, we must resolutely oppose it and work for peaceful reunification. We are ready to create vast space for peaceful reunification; but we will leave no room for separatist activities in any form.

We Chinese will decide our own affairs. The Taiwan question is an internal affair that involves China’s core interests and the Chinese people’s national sentiments, and no external interference will be tolerated. Any attempt to use the Taiwan question as a pretext to interfere in China’s internal affairs or obstruct China’s reunification will meet with the resolute opposition of the Chinese people, including our compatriots in Taiwan. No one should underestimate our resolve, will and ability to defend China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

We will work with the greatest sincerity and exert our utmost efforts to achieve peaceful reunification. But we will not renounce the use of force, and we reserve the option of taking all necessary measures. This is to guard against external interference and all separatist activities. In no way does it target our fellow Chinese in Taiwan. Use of force would be the last resort taken under compelling circumstances. We will only be forced to take drastic measures to respond to the provocation of separatist elements or external forces should they ever cross our red lines.

We will always be ready to respond with the use of force or other necessary means to interference by external forces or radical action by separatist elements. Our ultimate goal is to ensure the prospects of China’s peaceful reunification and advance this process.

Some forces in the US are making every effort to incite groups inside Taiwan to stir up trouble and use Taiwan as a pawn against China. This has jeopardized peace and stability across the Taiwan Straits, obstructed the Chinese government’s efforts towards peaceful reunification, and undermined the healthy and steady development of China-US relations. Left unchecked, it will continue to escalate tension across the Straits, further disrupt China-US relations, and severely damage the interests of the US itself. The US should abide by the one-China principle, deal with Taiwan-related issues in a prudent and proper manner, stand by its previous commitments, and stop supporting Taiwan separatists.

4. Working with Our Fellow Chinese in Taiwan Towards National Reunification and Rejuvenation

National reunification is an essential step towards national rejuvenation. The future of Taiwan lies in China’s reunification, and the wellbeing of the people in Taiwan hinges on the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, an endeavor that bears on the future and destiny of the people on both sides. A united and prosperous China will be a blessing for all Chinese, while a weak and divided China will be a disaster. Only China’s rejuvenation and prosperity can bring lives of plenty and happiness to both sides. But it requires the joint efforts of both sides, as does the complete reunification of the country.

Separatist propaganda and the unresolved political dispute between the two sides have created misconceptions over cross-Straits relations, problems with national identity, and misgivings over national reunification among some fellow Chinese in Taiwan. Blood is thicker than water, and people on both sides of the Straits share the bond of kinship. We have great patience and tolerance and we will create conditions for closer exchanges and communication between the two sides, and to increase our compatriots’ knowledge of the mainland and reduce these misconceptions and misgivings, in order to help them resist the manipulation of separatists.

We will join hands with our fellow Chinese in Taiwan to strive for national reunification and rejuvenation. We hope they will stand on the right side of history, be proud of their Chinese identity, and fully consider the position and role of Taiwan in China’s rejuvenation. We hope they will pursue the greater good of the nation, resolutely oppose separatism and any form of external interference, and make a positive contribution to the just cause of China’s peaceful reunification.

Bright Prospects for Peaceful Reunification

Once peaceful reunification is achieved under One Country, Two Systems, it will lay new foundations for China to make further progress and achieve national rejuvenation. At the same time, it will create huge opportunities for social and economic development in Taiwan and bring tangible benefits to the people of Taiwan.

1. Taiwan will have a vast Space for Development

Taiwan boasts a high level of economic growth, industries with distinctive local features, and robust foreign trade. Its economy is highly complementary with that of the mainland. After reunification, the systems and mechanisms for cross-Straits economic cooperation will be further improved. Backed up by the vast mainland market, Taiwan’s economy will enjoy broader prospects, become more competitive, develop steadier and smoother industrial and supply chains, and display greater vitality in innovation-driven growth. Many problems that have long afflicted Taiwan’s economy and its people can be resolved through integrated cross-Straits development with all possible connectivity between the two sides. Taiwan’s fiscal revenues can be better employed to improve living standards, bringing real benefits to the people and resolving their difficulties.

Taiwan’s cultural creativity will also enjoy a great boost. Both sides of the Taiwan Straits share the culture and ethos of the Chinese nation. Nourished by the Chinese civilization, Taiwan’s regional culture will flourish and prosper.

2. The Rights and Interests of the People in Taiwan will be Fully Protected

Provided that China’s sovereignty, security and development interests are guaranteed, after reunification Taiwan will enjoy a high degree of autonomy as a special administrative region. Taiwan’s social system and its way of life will be fully respected, and the private property, religious beliefs, and lawful rights and interests of the people in Taiwan will be fully protected. All Taiwan compatriots who support reunification of the country and rejuvenation of the nation will be the masters of the region, contributing to and benefitting from China’s development. With a powerful motherland in support, the people of Taiwan will enjoy greater security and dignity and stand upright and rock-solid in the international community.

3. Both sides of the Taiwan Straits will Share the Triumph of National Rejuvenation

The people of Taiwan are brave, diligent and patriotic, and have made unremitting efforts to improve themselves. They revere their ancestry and love their homeland. Working together and applying their talents, people on both sides of the Taiwan Straits will create a promising future. After reunification, we Chinese will bridge gaps and differences caused by long-term separation, share a stronger sense of national identity, and stand together as one. After reunification, we can leverage complementary strengths in pursuit of mutual benefit and common development. After reunification, we can join hands to make the Chinese nation stronger and more prosperous, and stand taller among all the nations of the world.

The people separated by the Taiwan Straits share the same blood and a common destiny. After reunification, China will have greater international influence and appeal, and a stronger ability to shape international public opinion, and the Chinese people will enjoy greater self-esteem, self-confidence and national pride. In Taiwan and on the mainland the people will share the dignity and triumph of a united China and be proud of being Chinese. We will work together to refine and implement the Two Systems solution to the Taiwan question, to improve the institutional arrangements for implementing the One Country, Two Systems policy, and to ensure lasting peace and stability in Taiwan.

4. Peaceful Reunification of China is Conducive to Peace and Development in the Asia-Pacific and the Wider World

Peaceful cross-Straits reunification is of benefit not only to the Chinese nation, but to all peoples and the international community as a whole. The reunification of China will not harm the legitimate interests of any other country, including any economic interests they might have in Taiwan. On the contrary, it will bring more development opportunities to all countries; it will create more positive momentum for prosperity and stability in the Asia-Pacific and the rest of the world; it will contribute more to building a global community of shared future, promoting world peace and development, and propelling human progress.

After reunification, foreign countries can continue to develop economic and cultural relations with Taiwan. With the approval of the central government of China, they may set up consulates or other official and quasi-official institutions in Taiwan, international organizations and agencies may establish offices, relevant international conventions can be applied, and relevant international conferences can be held there.

Conclusion

Over its 5,000-year history, China has created a splendid culture that has shone throughout the world from past times to present, and has made an enormous contribution to human society. After a century of suffering and hardship, the nation has overcome humiliation, emerged from backwardness, and embraced boundless development opportunities. Now, it is striding towards the goal of national rejuvenation.

Embarking on a new journey in a new era, the CPC and the Chinese government will continue to rally compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Straits, and lead the efforts to answer the call of the times, shoulder historic responsibilities, grasp our fate and our future in our own hands, and work hard to achieve national reunification and rejuvenation.

The journey ahead cannot be all smooth sailing. However, as long as we Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Straits devote our ingenuity and energy to the same goal, let there be no doubt – we will tolerate no foreign interference in Taiwan, we will thwart any attempt to divide our country, and we will combine as a mighty force for national reunification and rejuvenation. The historic goal of reuniting our motherland must be realized and will be realized.

URL of the original publication: https://english.news.cn/20220810/df9d3b8702154b34bbf1d451b99bf64a/c.html

Notes

[1] United Nations Juridical Yearbook 2010, p. 516.

[2] Between September 4 and 8, 1951, the United States gathered a number of countries in San Francisco for what they described as the San Francisco Peace Conference. Neither the PRC nor the Soviet Union received an invitation. The treaty signed at this meeting, commonly known as the Treaty of San Francisco, included an article under which Japan renounced all rights, title and claim to Taiwan and the Penghu Islands. This treaty contravened the provisions of the Declaration by United Nations signed by 26 countries – including the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and China – in 1942, the fundamental principles of the UN Charter, and the basic norms of international law. The PRC was excluded from its preparation, drafting and signing, and its rulings on the territory and sovereign rights of China – including the sovereignty over Taiwan – are therefore illegal and invalid. The Chinese government has always refused to recognize the Treaty of San Francisco, and has never from the outset deviated from this stance. Other countries, including the Soviet Union, Poland, Czechoslovakia, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Mongolia, and Vietnam, have also refused to recognize the document’s authority.

[3] In his speech titled “Continue to Promote the Reunification of the Motherland” on January 30, 1995, Jiang Zemin, then general secretary of the CPC Central Committee and president of China, made eight proposals for the development of cross-Straits relations and peaceful national reunification. He emphasized, “Adhering to the one-China principle is the basis and prerequisite for peaceful reunification”, and “in not promising to renounce the use of force, we are in no way targeting our Taiwan compatriots, but rather foreign forces conspiring to interfere in China’s peaceful reunification and bring about Taiwan independence”. (See Selected Works of Jiang Zemin, Vol. I, Eng. ed., Foreign Languages Press, Beijing, 2009, pp. 407-412.)

[4] This figure does not include reinvestment by Taiwan investors through a third place.

[5] From the statistics of the April 2022 edition of the World Economic Outlook databases of the International Monetary Fund.

Ambassador Al Kuwari salutes the Swiss Confederation

Bern, 1 August 2022, Swiss Confederation: On the ocassion of the Swiss National Day, the State of Qatar’s top envoy to the confederation, HE Ambassador Mohammed Jaham Al Kuwari, addressed the Swiss government and people in a multilingual message that one can enjoy below: 

Ambassador Al Kuwari has been serving as Qatar’s top envoy to Switzerland since 4 NovemberĀ 2021, after he presented credentials to the then serving Swiss Federal PresidentĀ Guy Parmelin. Al Kuwari was not stranger to Switzerland, and as a matter of fact, he served already in the capacity as non-resident head of mission heeding relations from Paris between 2003 and 2013. During the latter period he was resident head of mission vis-Ć -vis the French Republic in Paris with concurrencies to Switzerland, the Holy See, Monaco, and Portugal.Ā 

Qatar established a resident embassy in Bern in September 2012. The latter mission is likewise responsible for relations vis-Ć -vis the Principality of Liechtenstein. 

Before arriving in Bern, Ambassador Mohammed Al Kuwari, had been serving as head of mission in Germany, Spain and the United States of America. He is fluent in his native Arabic, in addition to French, and English but likewise holds a good understanding of the German and Spanish languages. 

For further information:

Embassy of the State of Qatar in the Swiss Confederation: https://bern.embassy.qa/en/the-embassy/about-us

Mohammed Jaham Al Kuwari – Picture by NCUSAR – Picture through Wikipedia licence, see: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mohammed_Jaham_Al_Kuwari_2014_National_University_Model_Arab_League_crop.jpg

Conflicting values and conflicting narratives: the case of Russia’s war on Ukraine

Paper presented on 4 August at a session of the conference on peace held by the Universal Peace Federation in London. The title of the session was ā€œConflicting Narratives and Values – Perspective for a Common Vision and Peace Cultureā€

Willy FautrƩ, director of Human Rights Without Frontiers

Internal conflicts and wars between neighboring countries do not suddenly break out from a vacuum as it is can be seen in Ethiopia or in Ukraine. They are often the results of ongoing tensions deeply rooted in history or in conflicting and even aggressive narratives. The wars in the Balkans after the collapse of the Yugoslav Federation in the 1990s were the last example of it in the 20th century.

National, ethnic, linguistic and religious identities exacerbated by biased and inflammatory narratives in the political discourse, in the media and in school education as well as territorial claims were at the heart of massacres perpetrated for several years in former Yugoslavia. The war between Azerbaijan and Armenia in 2020 is another example of the dramatic consequences of long-standing violent rhetoric grounded in irredentist nationalism.

On 24 February, to everyone’s surprise, the Russian army invaded Ukraine from the north, the south and the east. But this should not have been a surprise. Since the duo Dmitry Medvedev – Vladimir Putin came to power in Moscow, Russia has been waging war ever.

Putin’s narratives in his successive wars

In 1999-2000, Vladimir Putin led the second Chechen war as Prime Minister. His publicly stated goal was the eradication of the Chechen nation. According to Putin’s narrative, it was not a war but a ā€œspecial anti-terrorist operationā€ against separatists to preserve the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation. During this operation, the capital Grozny was completely razed to the ground by Russian bombing, to the extent that in 2003 the United Nations called Grozny “the most destroyed city on earth”. Since then, the Ukrainian city of Mariupol has probably overtaken it.

In 2008, Russia fomented the separatist war in South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia, recognised their independence and has since provided them with the so-called protection from its military. Putin’s narrative to justify his aggression was to save the Russian speakers of Georgia.

Since 2014, the Ukrainian territories of the Donbas and Crimea have been wrested from Ukraine. About the annexation of Crimea, Putin’s narrative was that Stalin had attached Crimea to the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine by mistake and the inhabitants of the peninsula were historically Russian. As to the conflict in Donbas, Putin’s rhetoric was that it was an internal conflict between persecuted and discriminated Russian-speaking Ukrainians and their nationalist government in Kyiv but he claimed he was not involved. However, everybody knows that he was using the separatists as proxies to destabilize Ukraine.

In Syria, in 2015-2018, Putin’s war led to massive destruction. Officially, it was to help dictator Bashar al-Assad defeat ISIS and other Islamist terrorist groups. It was also to protect Christians and their churches from these groups and thus appear as the great and only defender of Christianity in the Middle East, especially Orthodoxy, a path that European governments were reluctant to take for various reasons. Vladimir Putin was very publicly thanked by Eastern Orthodox church dignitaries for his military involvement in Syria.

However, behind this official narrative there was also the plan to rid Bashar al-Assad of his various political opponents, at the cost of massacring civilians, destroying homes, hospitals, schools, and infrastructure providing water and electricity to the population. Aleppo became a martyred city and Russia lost its seat on the UN Human Rights Council as a result.

Putin’s narrative is well known and well oiled. He is now applying it in the rest of Ukraine as he has done in all his other previous wars.

Putin’s dream of resurrecting a Russian Empire

In Putin’s narrative, Ukraine as a sovereign state never existed in the past and was called “Little Russia.” The current Ukrainian state is an artficial state run by Nazis, Ukrainian identity does not exist and the Ukrainian language is an offshoot of the noble and rich Russian language, according to Putin. The country must be allegedly denazified and disarmed. Ukraine is part of the Slavic world and therefore part of Russia, just like Belarus, he says. The current Ukrainian state, its language and culture must be destroyed. Its territory must be invaded by war whatever the cost, occupied and Russified again; its remaining inhabitants and their future generations must be colonised. This is the narrative that Putin is serving up to the entire Russian population and to the international community.

The Ukrainian counter-narrative is that Kyiv existed long before Moscow and was the cradle of Orthodoxy, first with the conversion of Prince Vladimir in Kherson by a bishop of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and then with the baptism of his people in Kyiv Rus in 988, while the first written records of Moscow’s existence date back only to 1147, 160 years later.

The war with its cynical procession of terror, war crimes and crimes against humanity enables Putin to depopulate the country through mass migrations to the West and mass deportations of Ukrainians to the East, to Russia. The territories occupied since 2014 have been colonised and Russified. All Orthodox churches that were not under the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate have been eradicated, as have been other religions which did not recognise the annexation of Crimea and Putin’s rule.

Conflicting narratives?

But let us go back to the title of this session, which contains two key words: conflicting narratives. In totalitarian or dictatorial societies, there can be no confrontation of ideas. In the case of Putin’s Russia, there is only one truth: the one of the Leader. Putin has been preparing his war against Ukraine for a very long time. For two decades, he has built up a colossal armament, including nuclear weapons. With the blessing of Patriarch Kirill, he has progressively eliminated religious diversity, for example by criminalising the activities of Jehovah’s Witnesses as extremist. about a hundred of them are in prison for many years and many more are on the same path. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been expelled from Russia. All Russian NGOs receiving money from the West, including the European Union, have been accused of being foreign agents and banned.

The editor of Novaya Gazeta, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in December 2021, had to close his newspaper to avoid going to prison. All independent media have been closed, fined heavily or have survived only abroad. More than 3,000 websites have been closed. A law has criminalized the use of the word “war” in public and private spaces, providing sentences of to 15 years in prison. Public anti-war demonstrations have been prohibited, and even individual silent picketing.

Putin’s instrumentalisation of the Russian Orthodox Church and vice versa

In Putin’s narrative, the claimed Slavic-Orthodox identity of Russia is strongly intertwined. This identity is supposed to be threatened by a decadent West that ā€˜advertises’ homosexuality, same-sex marriages, gender culture and other so-called decadent values in opposition to the traditional values of the Orthodox Church. A Western world that believes itself to be invested with a civilizational and civilizing mission and that it wants to impose on the rest of the world, including Russia and other Slavic lands, by financing NGOs, human rights organisations and media importing its pseudo-values into Russia. A messianism that has produced genocidal colonialism and supremacist imperialism for centuries, according to Putin. Hence the need to protect, vaccinate and purify Russian society against this Western plague.

Patriarch Kirill and the President have long been staunch allies in this fight against the West and the head of the Russian Orthodox Church has blessed the war on Ukraine as a metaphysical war against evil forces. The growing desire of Ukraine to divorce itself from the Russian world and to make a new life for itself with another partner, the European Union based on democratic values, had become an existential threat to Russia. This ā€˜infidelity’ in a forced marriage had to be brought to an end. Hence the appalling war we are witnessing.

Conclusions

Let us return to the question in the title of this session “What are the prospects for a common vision of a culture of peace?ā€ What are the prospects in the case of Russia and Ukraine? This question is coming too late because the war is too far advanced and perhaps we should have better worked on this issue in the West and in Ukraine in due time. Maybe the outcome would have been different but maybe not. So, the answer is now very simple and very short: these prospects are nil because the values of Russia and Ukraine have become irreconcilable. At most they could co-exist in their respective territories after the war, behind a cultural iron curtain. Maybe or maybe not.

Without wishing to play the Cassandra, however, I would dare say that there is something more serious ahead. Putin’s war in Europe against democratic values is only the first wide scale assault on the West. The great dictatorial and conquering empires of the past are waking up in Moscow, Istanbul and Beijing. China with its dictatorial regime is on the same path as Putin’s Russia against the expansion of Western values at home and in the world. It may now be time to think about avoiding a new hybrid global war starting in the Pacific.

Photo credits: Reuters

Share the link to this article posted on HRWF website: https://bit.ly/3A4CZo3

Read more about Human Rights in Russia on HRWF.eu

Khalid Fahad Al Hajri represents Qatar in Belgium and Luxembourg

Wednesday, 27th April 2022, Luxembourg City, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg: At the Grand Ducal Palace in the capital’s city centre, His Royal Highness Grand Duke Henri of Luxembourg, Duke of Nassau, welcomed for his accrediation, HE Ambassador Khalid Fahad Al Hajri, who presented to the world’s only remaining grand duke, the best regards from His Highness The Emir of Qatar and the people of his homeland. 

Al Hajri represents his country as non-resident head of mission in Luxembourg, whilst being resident in Brussels, wherein he is accredited as top envoy since Tuesday, 19 October 2021, when he presented his letters of credence to His Majesty The King of the Belgians at the Royal Palace. Thereby returning to serving at an embassy abroad after having servved at the Qatari Foreign Ministry in Doha since 2018 within the cabinet of the chief of diplomacy, and in particularly in the Cabinet of the Special Envoy of the Minister of Foreign Affairs for Counterterrorism and Mediation in Conflict Resolution between November 2018 and September 2021. Previous to that, he is fondly recollected for his service in the capacity as Deputy Head of Mission at the Qatari Embassy to the Kingdom of the Netherlands between 2013 and 2018. 

Ambassador Al Hajri speaks his native Arabic in addition to English, and some French. 

For further information 

Embassy of the State of Qatar to Belgium and Luxembourg: https://brussels.embassy.qa/en/the-embassy/ambassador

Household of HRH The Grand Duke of Luxembourg: https://monarchie.lu/fr/actualites/accreditations-de-nouveaux-ambassadeurs-au-luxembourg-27-avril-2022

Leonardo’s faces – Marc van Oostveen

The Leonardo Royal Hotel Den Haag Promenade is represented by both new and more experienced employees working together with passion as one team, to deliver great service and to depict the hotel’s values. In these monthly written pieces, there is a focus on their values and their approach to our international clients.

Who are the employees as an individual? Allow us to introduce you to    
Marc van Oostveen

  • Nationality: Dutch
  • Function: Reception employee
  • Department: Front Office

When did you start working at the Promenade Hotel?

I started working at the Promenade Hotel back in September 2021, so it has almost been a year now.

What was your first impression of the Promenade Hotel?

When I first walked into the Promenade Hotel for my job interview, I immediately felt the warm and great atmosphere. It felt like coming home, even though I had never been here. I was greeted by sincere smiles and some fresh warm coffee as my (back then) future manager Else came to have a chat with me. After that chat I already knew; I want to work for this Hotel, this feels like home. I still remember that day vividly, and after 10 months it still feels like coming home whenever I get here.

What makes the Promenade Hotel suitable for welcoming people from all around the world?

What makes the Promenade Hotel suitable for welcoming people from all around the world, has to be our international events. We have the Food Festivals, and now with the new concept for our restaurant, LEO’S International Flavors, there are even more ways to see and taste the culture of different countries. Also, it is another way for people from other countries to taste some of their home cuisine, which is nice when you’re in a different country.

What do you value most in the organization of diplomatic events at the Promenade Hotel?

The thing I value most in the organization of diplomatic events at the Promenade Hotel must be teamwork; in order for an event to be successful you need good communication and a solidly working team. Everyone is ought to know what the guests want, and you are only able to achieve this all together, with the entire team. Building on each other and helping each other to make sure an event is successful is by far one of the greatest things about this job.

What did you learn so far by working with diplomats? Some tips, rules or values to share?

This might sound weird, but what I learned about working with diplomats is that they are normal working people too. I always hold them in high regard, and of course you should still remain formal, but the diplomats I met until now sometimes get surprised/happy when I ask them how their day has been. I feel like they appreciate it, so that is a tip; ask them how their day has been. Another great tip I got is: have friends in different countries. You get to know so many different cultures, and you find new places to visit for holidays for example, because you have friends there.

Which Food Festival has been your favorite so far or would you like to experience?

This is kind of a cheat question, because the Peruvian Food Festival is the only Food Festival I have experienced so far, so that has to be my favorite as of right now. A Food Festival I would love to experience has to be a Hungarian Food Festival. I have not been to the country (yet), but I would love to. Who does not love a good goulash right?

What local food(s), from abroad, have you tried already?

There are lots of local foods I have tried abroad. The most notable ones are from Iceland, where I lived for a couple months during an internship. I tried Hakarl, which is fermented shark. It’s not my cup of tea if I am being honest. Smoked puffin meat, which is a flavor I have never experienced, but it was good nonetheless. Whale meat, which tasted like the most tender steak you would ever have in your life and of course BrennivĆ­n, which isn’t a food, but it’s the national Icelandic tipple.

What is your favorite drink or dish at LEO’s International Flavors?

My favorite dish at LEO’s International Flavors has got to be either the Taco, because I love Mexican food and it’s such an easy and accessible dish. A good runner-up is the Beef tataki, which is also amazing because I love Japanese food as well. My favorite drink is for sure the Pisco Sour. Sours in general (also for instance whisky sour and amaretto sour) are my favorites. I first tasted this drink during the Peruvian Food Festival and I am thrilled to see that the drink made it to our regular menu.

What sustainable development goal do you value most? Why this one?

The sustainable development goal I value most is affordable and clean energy. Without clean and affordable energy and energy efficiency our technology will not have the ability to keep evolving. Without better technology, we will not be able to achieve a lot of the sustainable goals, because energy is one of the, if not the most important thing in the world. Without energy our world would fall in total chaos, and we cannot keep using fossil fuels, as they are running out, so clean, affordable and sustainable energy is in my opinion the most important.

What piece of good advice did you receive, and from whom, that you would like to forward?

The best piece of advice I got, which is also a piece of advice that I would like to forward, is actually from a movie. The advice is: ā€˜ā€™Enjoy the little things.’’ There is way too much stuff in this world to worry about, so it is important to enjoy the fun small things in life, like watching a movie with your loved ones, going out for dinner with friends, walking through a forest on a rainy day (not too much rain though). It feels like everyone has too little time to actually enjoy themselves these days, which is sad to see.

Ensuring the independence of the legal profession in the context of constitutional reform in Uzbekistan

By Rasulev Abdulaziz Karimovich and Khujayev Shokhjakhon Akmaljon Ugli

In a state governed by the rule of law, ensuring a balance of power between the state and society is a prerequisite for the establishment of a democratic regime. This requires the strength of civil society institutions, which are the basis of the rule of law. Civil society, in fact, symbolizes conscious compliance with the requirements of the law and has the advantage of influence others in order to ensure the rule of law.

This lever is public control, successfully tested in the history of humankind and functioning in developed countries, or rather, local authorities, mass media and non-profit organizations. Therefore, the state is interested in developing and strengthening this system. In fact, this is the basis of civil society. In this regard, the reform of the Institute of Advocacy as a civil society institution, which by definition is a non-governmental and non-profit organization, is critical for improving the effectiveness of our country’s judicial and legal reforms.

Today, for any state, the advocacy is not only an institution for the protection of human rights and organizations, but also an important participant in the formation of civil society. In many ways, advocacy contributes to raising the level of legal awareness and legal culture of the population. Therefore, the effectiveness of legal regulation of advocates’ activities directly affects the implementation of constitutional rights and freedoms of the individual. In this regard, it is the constitutional guarantee of the independence of the advocacy that is most important.

In the current article 116 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan, constitutional guarantees were enshrined to ensure the right of the accused to receive protection, qualified legal assistance at any stage of the proceedings in the investigation and court bodies, as well as the role of the advocacy as an institution providing legal assistance to citizens, enterprises, institutions and organizations. Organizational foundations have been created in the country and a mechanism has been formed to promote the functioning of the legal defense system, especially the creation of an appropriate national infrastructure for advocacy.

Over the years of independence, 3 Laws of the Republic of Uzbekistan, more than 10 decisions of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan and the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan, and  several departmental regulatory legal acts have been adopted in order to reform the institute of advocacy, further strengthen the status and provide guarantees to advocates, and increase the reputation and prestige of the advocate profession. In turn, these regulatory documents have formed a kind of practice, prompting advocates to carry out their activities on a professional basis.

However, there are some problems with the functioning of the legal profession. Unfortunately, the number of advocates is insufficient. Today, there are more than 4 thousand advocates in Uzbekistan; there is an average of one specialist per 8.5 thousand residents of the country. For comparison, in European countries, there are 162 advocates for every 100,000 people.

Furthermore, 43 percent of advocates in Uzbekistan work in Tashkent (the state capital), and not a single law firm is registered in any of the country’s 20 districts. These figures clearly show the severity of the problem.

As part of the constitutional reform in Uzbekistan, it is proposed to consolidate the principles of independence and self-government, non-interference in the professional activity of an advocate. These principles are important in the context of ongoing judicial and legal reforms. Thus, in the Strategy of Actions for the Further Development of the Republic of Uzbekistan in 2022-2026 as the most important goal (Goal 19) within the framework of the direction of ensuring the rule of law and strengthening justice, ā€œa cardinal increase in the capacity of the institute of advocacy in the protection of human rights, freedoms and legitimate interestsā€ is indicated.

It should be noted that the independence and self-government of  advocacy is an important principle of international standards in the field of human rights and advocacy. The fundamental international human rights instrument is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. His famous article 1 says: ā€œAll human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood ā€. For the effective implementation of these, qualified legal assistance is also necessary, which is provided by the legal profession. Therefore, international legal standards in the field of advocacy closely complement international standards in the field of human rights.

One of the most striking examples of international standards are the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers. These principles show the importance of access to advocates and legal services. In particular, the importance of accessibility of the legal profession is indicated, which is ensured by the following measures:

– a guarantee of the right to appeal to any advocate for help to protect and defend his rights and protect him at all stages of criminal proceedings;

– ensuring the provision of sufficient financial and other means to provide legal services to socially vulnerable segments of the population;

– informing people about their rights and obligations under the law and about the important role of advocates in protecting their fundamental freedoms.

A special role should be assigned to the legal community. It is the legal community that should independently solve the issues of professional activity of advocates. One of the striking examples is the experience of the European Union. Thus, in Europe, there is a Code of Conduct for Advocates in the European Union, which applies to cross-border activities within the EU and was adopted in Strasbourg in 1988 by the Council of Advocates and Law Societies of Europe. Therefore, it is mandatory for all advocates from EU countries.

Recommendation No. R. (2000) 21 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the freedom of exercise the profession of lawyer suggests that all necessary measures should be taken to ensure that the freedom to practice the profession of a advocate is respected, protected and promoted without discrimination and unlawful interference by authorities or the public, especially in the light of the relevant provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights.

In this document, the practice of advocacy is considered in close connection with the cultural, social, political and historical context of each society. In any democratic society, advocates are called upon to play a crucial role in the administration of justice,  the prevention and resolution of disputes, as well as in the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Decisions regarding permission to practice law or become a member of this professional group should be made by an independent body. Control over such decisions — whether they are taken by an independent body or not — should be carried out by an independent, impartial judicial authority.

Advocacy is the most important legal institution of any state, standing for the protection of the fundamental rights of citizens and their associations. The confidence of every citizen or entrepreneur in their well-being and success largely depends on how strong, organized, and legally protected it is. Therefore, constitutional guarantees of independence and self-government are important both for the advocates themselves and for society.

About the authors:

Rasulev Abdulaziz Karimovich is the Deputy Director of the Research Institute for Legal Policy under the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Doctor of Sciences in Law, Professor.

Khujayev Shokhjakhon Akmaljon Ugli is the Head of the Department of Intellectual Property Law at Tashkent State University of Law, PhD

Rights of Nature: an evolving movement

By Dr. Dorine E. van Norren, independent researcher and civil servant

Few had heard of Rights of Nature fifteen years ago, but recently this new legal paradigm is becoming increasingly popular. That is, mostly in the Global South. Though it started in a few municipalities in the US since 2006 (starting with Pennsylvania), it is mostly the indigenous peoples who have embraced the concept. First in the Western Hemisphere and later in other continents. The Ojibwe in Minnesota declared rights for their wild rice (and related freshwater resources), the Ponca Nation (Oklahoma) claimed rights of Nature for their territory (to halt fracking) (2017). And 200 U.S. and Canadian tribal nations recognized the grizzly bear’s right to exist in a healthy ecosystem (to counter President Trump’s attempt to take it off the endangered species list). The people of Toledo also declared lake Eerie to have rights (later overturned by a federal judge in 2020).

Frontrunners were also Bolivia and Ecuador who enshrined the indigenous concept of Vivir Bien/Buen Vivir in their constitutions in 2008. The Andean concept lived by the Quecha people of Sumak Kawsay was the basis and centers around living in harmony with Nature, that is to say biocentric living. This is in contrast to the Western anthropocentric way of living which puts the human at the centre of the universe, above nature and in control of it. This biocentric belief is shared by most indigenous people.

Bolivia organized the Alternative Climate Summit in 2010, issuing a Universal Declaration (and adopting a national law) for the rights of Mother Earth. Recently (2022), it also gave rights to Lake Titicaca. In 2012 the UN organization for Harmony with Nature was established. At the same time Ecuador adopted the first constitution with a rights of Nature clause (art 71-73) in 2008.  Since then Colombia recognized the rights of several rivers (2016). Chile proposed a draft constitution recognizing the rights of Nature (to be voted on in September 2022). The Llaka Honhat community in Argentina won a case in which the InterAmerican court also recognized rights of Nature. And Mexico proposes (biodiversity) policies based on ā€˜ armonia con la naturaleza). Though not formally recognizing rights of Nature, Costa Rica has put many environmental policies in practice that are in this spirit.

Ecuador, however, remains the only country to constitutionally recognize these rights. To mention a few court cases that ensued. In a recent landmark decision the constitutional court forbid mining in the area of Los Cedros Forest, and courts did so for a few other areas (Llurimagua territory in Imbanbura, the indigenous Sinangoe terrirory & Amazon rivers, Pinas de la Chuva hills). Other cases involved limits on agriculture (pig farming pollution, shrimp farming in a mangrove area, pine tree plantation in a paramo ecoystem) and genetically modified crops limiting ā€˜food sovereignty’. The first case ever won gave the river Vilcabamba rights over the claimed right to development (road construction) by a municipality. And the Galapagos islands benefitted by enhanced jurisdiction tackling illegal shark fishing. Rights of Nature also included protection of animals, most notably the domesticized monkey Estrellita. In the case of oil spills by Chevron in the Amazon, decided on earlier by conventional environmental law, but disputed by the oil company, defendants recently also successfully invoked rights of Nature.

In the meantime other countries in the world are catching up. Bhutan enshrined guardianship of Nature in its constitution of 2008 (including mandatory forest cover of 60%) that is entirely based on its (Buddhist) Gross National Happiness philosophy. In the front row also sat New Zealand in 2012 giving rights to Te Urewere National Park, mountain and a river in cooperation with indigenous peoples. Uganda adopted a rights of Nature law in 2019. In the same year, the court in Bangladesh recognized rights of rivers and the local court in India of the Yamuna and Ganges rivers (later overturned by the Supreme Court). In Europe the Spanish are writing history giving rights to the Mar Menor lake (2022). In the Netherlands rights are being petitioned for the Waddenzee and the river Maas. The design museum Nieuwe Instituut became a zoƶp (zoƶperation giving voice to all life).

With this new movement some initial steps have been taken in the fight against climate change and protection of the Earth.

Ubi Brute?

By John Dunkelgrün

No one can predict the outcome of Putin’s war. As Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace writes in the New York Times (19/8/22), Mr. Putin aims to capture and hold on to the Donetsk/Luhansk region, make the rest of Ukraine a puppet state, and establish a new world order in which the ā€œWestā€ is run by people like Orban, Bolsonaro or Trump. Yet in many ways, he has already lost.

First, not just the rich countries of the ā€œWestā€, are trying to rid themselves of fossil fuels, but most of the world. His war has caused many countries and companies to turbo-charge that effort. In the short run, the world will face severe shortages, and Russia will get more money for less oil and gas. Starting in very few years, however, the demand for fossil fuels will go down sharply. China, India, and North Korea will continue to buy Russian oil and gas, albeit at steeply discounted prices, but they too understand climate change and the risks of depending on Mr. Putin’s Russia.

Secondly, the sanctions are starting to bite. Modern weaponry needs advanced technology which Russia doesn’t have. Its best and brightest were busy hacking, phishing, and influencing Western politics rather than developing world-class technological products and services. Without advanced technology, Russia simply cannot build weapons to match Nato.

Also, the focus on fossil fuels has caused the neglect of developing other parts of the economy, which will be much more difficult now that many parts can no longer be imported.

Thirdly the attempt to weaken Nato has spectacularly failed. Nato is now bigger, and more agile and its membership has increased its military spending massively. Ukraine is a candidate for membership in the European Union.

And most importantly, for many decades to come, not just Mr. Putin, but Russia as a state, has lost all credibility. No one, least of all its neighbors, will feel comfortable having Russia as a partner. The lies, the attacks on Crimea, then the Donbass, and now Ukraine with its brutal wanton bombardments of civilian targets are etched in the minds and memories of leaders all over the world. Even after the guns fall silent, the knowledge of the brutality and the cruelty will remain. Chances are, there will even be a Nürnberg-style trial.

There have been articles about the Russian people during this war they may not call that. They approve of Mr. Putin and his war, they feel hurt about the dismemberment of the Russia of yore, they don’t know any better because the only news they get is government-controlled, etc.

This may be true up to a point, but as the saying goes ā€œYou can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.ā€

Many Russians have relatives in Ukraine. Their messages, phone calls, and photos of destroyed buildings will eventually sink in. Mr. Putin may hide the casualties by using Wagner proxies, soldiers from remote areas, and using mobile crematoria rather than body bags to hide the tens of thousands of casualties, but eventually, people will wake up. Where is Sacha’s son, where is Katya’s uncle? Why was Uncle Dmitri’s house bombed? Why can’t we buy computers, see Netflix, and eat at a real McDonald’s?

The economy will slow down dramatically, every day more products will disappear from the shelves, paying mortgages for a house abroad will become almost impossible, and Russians will be shamed if they travel abroad.

For a while, Mr. Putin’s PR machine will provide boilerplate answers, but Russians aren’t stupid. Bit by bit their awareness will grow. Even the inner circle will get desperate. Mr. Putin will fall, not Hitler-style hunkering in a bunker but from forces within the country.

Beware of Brutus Mr. P.

He knows, and that perhaps is why he sits so absurdly far away from everyone.

Most-Favoured Nation: Renaissance or Requiem

By Philip Kariam

Preferential treatment among trading partners was once a potent tool in the sovereign toolbox. With the raising of tariffs during the Great Depression, policies like the British Empire’s system of Imperial Preferences, which reduced tariffs for members of the Commonwealth, gave an appreciable advantage to certain countries while disadvantaging others. By the end of the Second World War, the desire to reduce trade frictions and end favouritism culminated in the negotiation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947), which, in large part, sought to put an end to trade preferences through the most-favoured nation (MFN) obligation.

MFN remains one of international trade law’s core principles. It has, moreover, experienced a kind of rebirth in the public discourse stemming from recent events in Ukraine, with several states revoking MFN as a sanctioning tool. On the one hand, this invocation of MFN suggests that it continues to play an important role in the international arena; on the other, it adds to an already significant list of MFN’s exceptions. Whether it is experiencing a renaissance or requiem, however, understanding MFN continues to be essential for understanding trade relations.

MFN in the context of international trade law

To do so, it is helpful to begin with the framework of rules within which MFN sits –international trade law and the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements.

Modern international trade law developed on the foundation of the GATT 1947 and evolved through a series of negotiations culminating in the Uruguay Round, which established the WTO in 1994. Today, the WTO has 164 member states and covers almost all aspects of global trade.

The WTO consists of several agreements – to which all WTO members are a party – related to trade in goods and services, intellectual property, and trade remedies (i.e., anti-dumping and countervailing duties), among many other areas. The WTO also provides a forum for trade negotiations and a state-to-state dispute settlement mechanism.

What do these agreements actually do? In brief, they set out a series of rules governing trade between states. These rules are a mix of substantive law – e.g., the non-discrimination obligations and bound tariff rates – and oversight over domestic trade-related procedures – e.g., rules for dumping and subsidy investigations undertaken by domestic authorities.

A cornerstone principle…

MFN is one such rule. More than that, it is a core tenet of the WTO that pervades several of its agreements. It has been described as a ā€œcornerstone of the GATTā€ and ā€œone of the pillars of the WTO trading systemā€.

But it isn’t, as it sounds, about choosing favourites. To the contrary, MFN is a non-discrimination obligation, a requirement to accord the same treatment to all trading partners. As set out in the GATT, MFN means that any ā€œadvantage, favour, privilege or immunityā€ provided to the goods originating in one WTO member must be given ā€œimmediately and unconditionallyā€ to like goods originating in another WTO member.

Applied to tariffs, MFN means that like goods must be subject to the same duty rate, regardless of their country of origin. Thus, apples imported from Italy are subject to the same duties as apples from Chile; bicycles from Taiwan the same duties as bicycles from France, and so on. Legal disputes occur on issues such as whether two products are truly ā€œlikeā€ one another (query whether Fuji apples are ā€œlikeā€ Granny Smiths).

… with many exceptions

Like most legal rules, MFN has exceptions. The most significant of which is free trade agreements (FTAs) – e.g., the USMCA or the CPTPP – which have proliferated since the formation of the WTO. Despite providing better treatment to their members than the WTO agreements, FTAs are permitted under the GATT. Why? Because they contribute to the overall goal of lowering trade barriers. As of March 2022, no less than 354 FTAs were in force.

The WTO also permits members to deviate from MFN if, for example, their actions are necessary to protect human, animal or plant life, or are related to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources (to name just two of ten such exceptions). A WTO member may also take action it considers necessary for the protection of its ā€œessential security interestsā€, even if that action violates MFN – e.g., the US’s recent national security tariffs on steel and aluminum.

Anti-dumping and countervailing duties – which may be applied to specific countries where dumped or subsidized goods are found to originate – are yet other deviations from MFN permitted by the WTO.

If these exceptions seem significant, it is because they are. The expansion of FTAs alone has prompted some observers to regard MFN as the exception rather than the rule.

When nations fall out of favour

Nevertheless, MFN has gained a certain prominence of late stemming from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

On March 3, 2022, Canada ventured into the avant-garde by revoking Russia’s and Belarus’ MFN status, triggering the ā€œgeneral tariffā€ for goods from these countries (while Belarus is not a WTO member, it was granted MFN status under Canadian law). On April 8, the US followed suit, suspending ā€œnormal trade relationsā€ (i.e., MFN) with Russia and Belarus. Japan, the EU and UK have also announced intentions to revoke Russia’s MFN status.

This means that Russia and Belarus will face non-MFN tariffs (for Canada, this is generally on the order of between 30-35%) on all of their exports to these countries. For countries such as Canada and the US that have coupled MFN revocation with an outright ban on some of Russia’s most valuable exports (including petroleum), its real economic impact may be limited. Yet, because of MFN’s position at the centre of the WTO, its revocation sends a strong message – there has been a fundamental break from ā€œnormal trade relationsā€ between these parties.

Renaissance and requiem?

Though embattled by exceptions and deviations, the invocation of MFN as a kind of ā€œbig gunā€ sanctioning tool underlines its continued relevance for global trade. It demonstrates that MFN remains enmeshed in the WTO and international trade law, so much that it is a synonym for ā€œnormal trade relationsā€. At the same time, it provides further evidence of a willingness to deviate from MFN in order to achieve policy objectives, an apparent turn, in spirit, to the pre-GATT 1947 era when preferences were bestowed upon favoured countries. The relevance of MFN may only prevail so long as countries continue to value equitable treatment and reducing trade barriers above other considerations. For better or worse, this remains to be seen.

About the author:

Philip Kariam

Philip Kariam is an associate at McMillan LLP, where he practices international trade and investment law. His experience includes working as international trade counsel for the Province of Ontario and as a legal consultant for the World Bank.

He holds an LL.M from Georgetown University, a Master of International Affairs from Sciences Po, a JD from Osgoode Hall Law School, and a BASc from the University of Waterloo.

From the Tuscan hills to the world

By Alexandra Paucescu

Italy has always been one of my favorite family holiday destinations. All our Italian trips were filled with sunny weather, gorgeous sceneries, warm and friendly people and, of course, delicious food… a real threat to my diet… My fascination for this beautiful country, to which we, as Romanians, are strongly related by ancient historical ties, determined me to learn the language and get in touch with Italian expat communities everywhere we moved.

Although I never met her in person, Francesca Andreini captivated me from the very beginning. A cultivated woman, born in Florence and with various artistic interests, she has managed to define her role into the diplomatic world and find her own path, while accompanying her diplomatic husband.

Francesca Andreini and spouse.

From native Florence and the beautiful, beloved hills surrounding it, to Rome and later on to Syria, Senegal, USA and Thailand, there has been a beautiful life journey sprinkled with family events, parables and experiences that completed the marvelous and accomplished woman (also a mother of three) that she is today.

ā€˜My first jobs were in television production and advertising. At that time, my husband joined the Italian diplomatic service. I was fiercely against it at the beginning, the idea of losing my world, my identity, terrified me, but eventually he managed to persuade me. It was not easy for me to adapt to diplomatic life, to find my own sense of purpose. It was a gradual process.’

It takes strength and a determined mind to be able to adapt to such frequent moves. I have often struggled myself to find a meaningful way to express myself, during the diplomatic postings. What also troubles me is the change of role and identity that you feel when you return to your home country, where you have a different status and a different dynamic of life.

Francesca tells me: ā€˜I had a desire to build something that was truly mine, that could not be taken away from me at each moving. That’s how I began writing, about 15 years ago.  At first, there were stories for a literary review, Zibaldoni, and then my two novels: Nessuno ti può costringere (QuiEdit, 2009) and Primi anni a WDC (Edizioni del Gattaccio, 2015). The latter has also been translated and released in the USA, under the title Under American Skies (New Academia Publishing, 2021). In Rome, I also wrote some screenplays, venturing into a whole new and exciting field. My script, Senza me, received recognition of cultural interest in 2010 by the Ministry of Culture and a grant for its production. In Washington DC I joined a business networking association and co-created ParoLab, a club that promoted Italian literature in the U.S., through a reading group, literary events and book presentations.’

As you are now reading her story, I am sure you can easily understand how active and committed she is to her projects.

ā€˜When I moved back to Rome, my passion for literature translated into creating more cultural events, some literary readings and workshops on creative writing. The latter inspired my video tutorials on ā€œHow to overcome writer’s blockā€ (available on YouTube in Italian under the title ā€œCome superare il blocco dello Scrittoreā€, with English subtitles). In Thailand, I made my past experience available to the Embassy, providing benevolent help on several projects, such as editing an anthology of Italian-Thai short stories and then publishing short videos inspired by them, also producing a documentary about the Italian architectural heritage in Bangkok. In the meantime I’ve been teaching Italian culture and literary history at Chulalongkorn University as a guest lecturer, I’ve continued to contribute to Zibaldoni and have occasionally held some conferences both in Italy and Thailand.’

I can see that her years abroad have been extremely dynamic and fulfilling. But that’s because she made them this way and turned the downsides of diplomatic life into her advantages. Francesca says: ā€˜I always managed to find my own space, to give life to my own projects. It was indeed very time and energy-consuming having to start all over again at each new posting but, on the other hand, every country I have lived in has taught me something important, offering me precious opportunities of inner growth.

The most common false stereotype is that diplomatic life is easy, with plenty of comfort and luxury.

It is in many ways a difficult life, requiring sacrifices on a personal level, especially from spouses. Giving up your career, the job which defines you socially and provides you with independent revenue, in exchange for a gregarious role, is not easy. The diplomatic career often takes you to countries where daily life is difficult, where there are dangers and diseases you are not used to. And then, there is the difficulty of being far away from one’s country, one’s family and old friends. When my parents grew old and my mother became ill, living on the opposite side of the ocean was a cause for enormous stress for me.

While the role of a spouse is very important, it’s generally underestimated and usually taken for granted that we are there and provide all the support we can to our consorts. We don’t usually receive any kind of training, guidelines or support from our own country. On top of re-organizing the life of the entire family abroad, spouses often have a busy schedule that includes events they hold themselves. In addition, through their informal contacts, spouses are often able to create a network of acquaintances which can be quite valuable for their consorts. In short, being a diplomatic spouse is a real profession that requires care, commitment, time and skills. It is unfortunate that it does not have a proper recognition.’

Wise words coming from years of experience and also, no doubt, from a strong and wise philosophy of life… in her own words… ā€˜my strength is having a soft spot for everything’.

About the author:

Alexandra Paucescu


Alexandra Paucescu-
 Author of ā€œJust a Diplomatic Spouseā€ Romanian, management graduate with a Master in business, cultural diplomacy and international relations studies.

She speaks Romanian, English,Ā French, German and Italian,Ā  gives lectures onĀ intercultural communicationĀ and is an active NGO volunteer.