Author: W. Kadi (LLB/LLM, Chevening Alumni 22/23)
Background: The Switch.
In September 2019, Solomon Islands flicked the switch on for China, but Taiwan was the first to immediately switch off lights on the same day when Cabinet made the decision to change diplomatic ties. Since then, geopolitical scrap, foreign relations pressure, and media representations have painted some highly inflammatory perceptions and language tone towards the Solomon Islands. These narratives caused a great deal of pressure to the government and confusion amongst the people of Solomon Islands, even to this day.
In this brief article, the aim is to step back into time to try and understand Taiwan described as the Republic of China (ROC), and China described as the People’s Republic of China (PRC), for a start. The reason being, ordinary Solomon Islanders must be aware about the background issues between ROC and PRC, so that they get some fair amount of information to understand why there is still so much media coverage and interest from the world in Solomon Islands and the Indo-Pacific in general.
ROC and PRC: In a Nutshell.
ROC and PRC are two distinct representations of China that premised on two distinct political parties leading China in different eras. ROC governs China after the Kuomintang reunification (KMT) in 1928. ROC as a government in China, rules under the Chinese Nationalist Party (CNP). At that time, Taiwan was under Japanese rule.
At the end of World War 2 (WW2) in 1945, Japan surrendered Taiwan to ROC. In 1949, civil war broke out in China and the ROC government lost control of mainland China to the Communist Party (CP). The CP established PRC and became the legitimate government in China until today. Only Taiwan remained under the control of ROC. Meaning, the ROC regime shifted from Mainland China across to the island of Taiwan and established itself a base under the leadership of Chiang Kai-shek.
Throughout the 20th century, USSR and USA were the dominant power players in global geopolitics and they influenced the biggest political parties in China at that time. USA backed the CNP while the CP (before it became the CCP) was backed by the USSR.
Regardless of not being the ruling government post-1949, ROC continued to assert itself as the legitimate representative of China in the global level. ROC represented China when the UN was formed in 1945, and it also sits at the security council as China. PRC as China was actually barred from the UN by a United States’ veto and on subsequent occasions, their request to be a full member of the UN was always denied.
USA was already prepared to ditch the ROC regime in Taiwan, however, the Korean war in the 1950s made USA realized that Taiwan is critical for its security strategy in Asia. Thus, creating a unique trilateral relationship. This trilateral relationship can be studied separately.
The uncertainty about the dual representation of China in the UN as to whether it was ROC or PRC was confusing for the global community. The case of Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co. v. Northwest Airlines as cited in this article explained such ongoing complexity in this matter. Regardless, resolution 2758 in 1971, led by Albania and brought before the United Nation’s General Assembly decided that PRC as China is the legitimate representative of China in the UN.
ROC, PRC and Resolution 2758.
The United Nations General Assembly meeting on 25th October 1971, resolution 2758 on the issue of China’s representation in the United Nations was described as: Restoration of the lawful rights of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in the United Nations.
This resolution (2758) expelled ROC’s representation of China in the United Nation. As a result of UNGA majority membership votes, PRC replaced the ROC as the sole representative and rightful seat of China in the UN. This means that UN-related organizations and activities that have “sovereign states” as members cannot accept representatives from ROC. ROC representatives in the UN were therefore expelled based on resolution 2758.
In plain language, resolution 2758 says: UN does not recognize ROC as representing China, PRC rightfully represents China. Australia and New Zealand included, our two key traditional diplomatic partners, did not vote in favour of that resolution in 1971. Australia changed their position in 1972 to recognize PRC instead of ROC as rightfully representing China in the United Nations. USA changed their position to recognize resolution 2758 in 1979, with conditions passed under the Taiwan Relations Act 1979. New Zealand in 1980 changed their position to recognize PRC instead of ROC.
Post-1971 saw Taiwan in a divergence over its own position as well. Push and pull factors challenged the reunification wish and reclamation ideologies of Chiang Kai-shek and ROC. This traditional position was deviated from by a move towards independence for Taiwan. The independence movement stemmed from the pro-democracy Democratic Progressive Party.
As a modern state, Taiwan’s younger generation are more optimistic for an independent Taiwan rather than a reunification with China. This resulted in the change of position at the UN level as well where ROC eventually become represented as Taiwan. Taiwan’s task after these changes, is to strike a balance between maintenance of strong security relations with the US and close economic ties with China. This balancing act is significant for Taiwan in determining its future. For now, it is uncertain to conclude whether Taiwan or Chinese Taipei or ROC can be described as a State. The KMT and DPP parties continued to hold diverging view on this matter.
Solomon Islands and Taiwan (ROC): Before the Switch.
Solomon Islands became independent in 1978, seven years already after resolution 2758. In 1983, Solomon Islands entered diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and continued to campaign for ROC as the legitimate government of China every time there was a UNGA meeting.
When Solomon Islands recognized ROC and entered into diplomatic relations with Taiwan, Australia has already fled from that position in 1972, New Zealand in 1980 - these are two key diplomatic partners of Solomon Islands even till date. The whole world understands who the legitimate government in China is, yet Solomon Islands with few other small countries still recognize ROC.
The question in mind is: In 1983, did our leaders know in that resolution 2758 was already dismissed and expelled ROC from UNGA? or was there something else that convinced Solomon Islands to opt for ROC recognition? That I will not answer. Instead, I will let you research for yourself, or you can ask your grandfather about it.
Solomon Islands, ROC, and PRC in the 21st century: Into the Switch.
PRC as the legitimate government, is a global economic powerhouse today. It shouldn’t be a surprise or mystery as to why the Solomon Islands would want to switch relations from Taiwan to PRC.
Taiwan as ROC is still not a sovereign or independent country as well. Thus, Solomon Islands does not have strong leverage in the international trade context, (considering mineral stones, fish, and logs as key products) and partnering with a non-UN recognized regime just couldn’t help in expanding diplomatic trade bargains. Regardless, Taiwan is a respectable economy itself compared to Solomon Islands.
With PRC as a global raw material consumer, the switch in 2019 does make sense – the underlying narrative seem to be: forget about the non-UN recognized regime of Taiwan and let’s just deal with the UN-recognized sovereign government of China for trade and economic opportunities. Nothing about geopolitics or security interests.
Fear of Change, Geopolitics, Media, and Chaos: After the Switch.
Psychology will tell you that people want change but fear any action that would bring about the necessary change that one aspires to be or see. There are also behavioural factors that explain it. That fear of change is dangerous when pushed and not dealt with accordingly. This is exactly what happened to the majority of push and pull factors, gassed with geopolitics, and flamed by opportunists resulting in the riots of 2021.
To make it even worse, majority of the people in Solomon Islands were not aware that China and USA were at the height of an ongoing geopolitical power struggle over Taiwan. Thus, when China-SI relations commence, it is not surprising that USA had to resurface in Solomon Islands waters like a lost seal.
The most common international narrative on the switch were: Debt-Trap, Non-Democratic, and then came the big one – China’s security treaty in the Solomon Islands. In the local communities and in Honiara, the widely circulated narrative following the switch were: Communists, non-Christians, Owning Solomon Islands, even in some market houses you’d hear – the second coming is at hand. The only second coming I saw was the USA coming back after closing its embassy in 1993.
Let’s not undermine that Honiara has a record of rioting and looting cultivated by lack of economic opportunities, high rate of unemployment, over population, a sense of losing out to foreigners in our own homeland, and the matchstick to start a fire is a protest. All these can be triggered by political instability or simply just a disagreement over a football match – like that time when the Solomon Islands Football Federation Office at Lawson Tama was torched some years back. But we are better than that, and we as a people are realizing that our strength is in our diversity and unity.
Final Remarks: Media, Power Struggle, and Geopolitics.
With the analysis, observations, and discussions raised above, ordinary citizens can now have some background understanding that explains why the switch from Taiwan to China was so critical in the space of geopolitics. It is for our own benefit to at least dig a bit deeper into the internet, not just on what’s put on the surface of social media or major news outlets. Dig into websites, academic databases, and understand that there are things way bigger than us including geopolitics, and that the best thing we can all do as citizens of Solomon Islands is to contribute and toil for the best we can achieve, not just rant. This means acknowledging both progress and failures and working on the cause for the best way forward as a nation.
Reflections: Overall Summary.
In my opinion, the Solomon Islands government in 2019 undermined or already knew the impact of social media, the press, and people’s emotional reaction. Everything that happened following the switch was so rapid – uncontrolled and dangerous. Yet, the ruling DCGA government guided the country through it all. We were bruised and everything else distorted, but we survived.
In a culturally diverse country with deeply entrenched Christian values and a colonial rooted education and governance system, the tendency to acknowledge and accept non-Christian and non-democratic perspectives, is a huge challenge. Even worse, when corruption was already prevalent especially in the logging industry, the tendency to see China the sovereign country, as careless and corrupt as the loggers, was already ripe. Corruption in the logging industry is of our own making as Solomon Islanders. Weak laws, selfish tribal and community leaderships, lack of resources for enforcement and incompetent administration.
Many other countries have diplomatic ties with China, yet with Solomon Islands, some countries and some media outlets went all out to try and stop the diplomatic relationship – even to the point of attempting to reverse it by supporting local anti-China actions. I am not surprised about the riots in 2021, regardless of the intention to only stage a peaceful protest. I am also not surprised by the government’s request to China for security support because Australia’s support personnels and the Solomon Islands police cannot even handle the 2021 riots, which threatened newly built infrastructures and also key businesses in Honiara – and a direct threat to our own status as a country.
My other opinion as well is that; the Solomon Islands government was never given the opportunity and space to breath and settle in before rolling out its action plans for economic growth and infrastructure development with China. As soon as it entered relationship with China, everyone jumped up and started running around with whistles, guns, and more aid.
Then came Covid-19, then came the riots; all simultaneously disrupting the demands for construction of the 2023 Pacific Games. It is barely a miracle we survived the past five (5) years without spiralling down into a state of chaos. Yet, the country delivered, and survived – and so I believe it is a miracle and divine intervention. Even much more refreshing is the free and peaceful elections on 17 April 2024, and the Prime Ministerial election on 2 May 2024.
The deteriorating condition of the health sector, the roads, and the education sector were long outstanding issues accumulating over successive governments. It is a hoax to use them as justification for DCGA’s failure to prioritize national interests. We must accept the bitter pill that all successive governments – since independence and including Sogavare’s DCGA were not perfect and have their fair share of failures and shortcomings. The difference between previous successive governments and the DCGA is, no one was bold enough to take the leap that DCGA did. Regardless of how they did it, it’s done. We are on a new route to advancing our development and economic growth, aspirations, and priorities.
With all these happening, the demonstration of geopolitics, adjustments to strategic security concerns, restructuring of aid coordination and disbursement priorities from other diplomatic partners, Solomon Islanders are starting to realize a lot. We are watching and observing everything. Most importantly, be reminded that we are always free people – always belonging to our tribes, lands, and connected to our ancestral heritage. Disrupted by colonization but learning from it and still finding our position towards economic independence, after more than 40 years of political independence.
Add comment
Comments