The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Taiwan Should be Recognised by the United Nations as an Independent Nation

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/26/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,093 times Debate No: 60945
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)





Taiwan: The Isles of Formosa, Penghu, Xiyu, Baisha, Qimei, Wang'an, Kinmen, Lieyu, Dadan, Erdan, Nangan, Beigan, Dongyin, Xiyin, Dongju, Xiju, Daqiu, Xiaoqiu, Taiping Island, Pratas Island, North Vereker Bank and South Vereker Bank. (Here's a map

First round is for acceptance only.


I accept this challenge. As I have lived in Taiwan I await to see why you believe this.
Debate Round No. 1


Devaluing the UN

Taiwan is democratic nation which has a much better human rights record than most members of the United Nations. When Taiwan is dismissed as a rouge state by the UN it devalues the credibility of the UN.

Standing Up to China

From my understanding the main reason why Taiwan is no longer recognised by the UN is because China (and to a lesser extent Japan) claims sovereignty over Taiwan. If Taiwan was given UN membership this would show China that it cannot always get its way diplomatically and might stop China throwing its weight around.


Taiwan is the worlds 18th biggest economy (GDP not PPP) in because of this it is highly important for international trade. It is ridicules that a nation which has such a powerful and important economy should be excluded from talks which will ultimately effect Taiwan and its people.


Thanks to my opponent form their opening statement. In this round I will give my own argument why Taiwan should not be recognized as an independent nation, then in the final round I will address my opponents arguments and clarify my own points.

The most important question to ask is, “how did Taiwan come into being?”

The special governing state that is known as Taiwan today was initially inhabited by Aboriginal tribes for many years before the Chinese officially arrived. As my opponent is specifically addressing China, I gather they mean that we are addressing the Chinese occupations recognition as an independent state.(1) The Chinese then occupied Taiwan through a series of migrations over the years starting from the about the 1650s on. The Chinese then controlled Taiwan until 1894, when the Japanese occupied it after China lost the first Sino-Japanese War. Japan controlled Taiwan until the end of WW2, where after China regained control of Taiwan and thats is where the history also starts to get interesting.

It is at this point important to distinguish between the China (the Peoples Republic of China) that we know today and the Republic of China. At the end of WW2 there was a popular peoples revolt in China led by Mao Zedong of the Chinese Communist Party which crushed the Republic of China (ROC) and created the Peoples Republic of China (PRC).(2,3) At this point the defeated ROC with their immense wealth and stolen cultural objects fled to Taiwan with the express intent of relaunching an attack on the Chinese mainland.(4)

At first the UN did not recognize the PRC from 1949 (when the ROC was defeated) until 1971.(5) The main reason was that the PRC was communist. If you do not believe this then you should realize that the main opponent to the PRC becoming a member of the UN was the US. In fact the US only accepted the PRC's status in 1979 (well after the rest of the world and the UN) which was astounding as it was still in the grips of the cold war.(6) However, clearly international pressure was beginning to mount with the popular uprising victor awarded the spoils of war.

From this we can see that the PRC is the governing country of the state of Taiwan, as it is Chinese territory when we follow and analyze the well established history.

It should be remembered that in wars or popular uprisings of the people over oppressive governments we usually cheer.(7) It seems however that my opponent wants to jeer in the face of the Chinese popular uprising. Is my opponent in fact championing the oppressive reign of Chiang Kai-Shek? He was after all the president of the ROC for an undemocratic 25 years.(8) In fact, he is one of the major reasons that the popular uprising in China happened under Mao in the first place.(9)

It seems to me really a clear and shut case that Taiwan should not be independent, as the state was started by a tyrant and a thief whose main aim was to attack China again. Is this what we as a civilized people want to teach and accept? Should we be supporting ISIS as they try overthrow a democratically elected government?

In this round I have shown Taiwan is historically and logically a state of China. I have also shown that the state of Tawian (ROC) was a defeated tyrannical government thats express aim was to attack China again. If the USA had given them support the ROC would have probably crushed the popular uprising of the people in China.

I now hand the debate back to my opponent.

Debate Round No. 2


I will be spending more or less all my time arguing against my opponents historical arguments but first I should state that the statement "Taiwan should be recognised by the united nations as an independent nation" is not in any way equivalent to the statement "China (PRC) should not be recognised by the united nations as an independent nation". There are many nations that claim territory considered to be part of another nation or even entire other nations. For instance is the statement "Ukraine should be recognised by the united nations as an independent nation" equivalent to "Russia should not be recognised by the united nations as an independent nation" (as a counter the a coming argument I am referring here to the Crimean dispute rather than the Donetsk dispute)? Or does the sentence "Pakistan should be recognised by the united nations as an independent nation" mean "Armenia should not be recognised by the united nations as an independent nation".

Chinese Popular Uprising

"It seems however that my opponent wants to jeer in the face of the Chinese popular uprising."

I think you have overlooked what that uprising you are glorifying did. The Chinese revolution of 1949 threw out a democratic (if flawed) system with totalitarian one party rule which lead to between 30 and 40 million deaths [1].

But seeing as you are totally behind a peoples right to rule themselves I assume you support the right of the Taiwanese to determine their own future right? You see only seven percent of the Taiwanese population supports unification with China [2].

Taiwan's Past

"Is my opponent in fact championing the oppressive reign of Chiang Kai-Shek?"

Taiwan is now and has been for several decades a pluralistic democracy. There are many nations with shady pasts, here is a list:

Afghanistan [3]
Albania [4]
Algeria [5]
Angola [6]
Argentina [7]
Armenia [8]
Australia [9]
Austria [10]
Azerbaijan [11]
Bahamas [12]
Bahrain [13]
Bangladesh [14]
Barbados [15]
Belarus [16]
Belgium [17]
Belize [18]
Benin [19]
Bhutan [20]
Bolivia [21]
Bosnia [22]
Botswana [23]
Brazil [24]
Burundi [25]
Bulgaria [26]
Burkina Faso [27]
Burma [28]
Burundi [29]
Cambodia [30]
Cameroon [31]
Canada [32]
Cape Verdi [33]
CAR [34]
Chad [35]
Chile [36]
Columbia [37]
China [38]
Columbia [39]
Comoros [40]
Congo [41]
Costo Rica [42]
Croatia [43]

I could go on but I think you get the point. Every country has a dark history. Would you deny any of these nations their UN membership?

Overthrow of Democratic Governments

"Should we be supporting ISIS as they try overthrow a democratically elected government?"

No just as you shouldn't be supporting the violent overthrow of a democratic government [44].



Thanks to my opponent for an interesting debate. However, I am do not believe you have justified your stance as multiple arguments you made in round 2 do not stand up under scrutiny. In this round, by addressing these arguments presented I hope to improve my position in this debate.

Devaluing the UN

My opponent continually in their opening and closing arguments talks about an independent nation. However, they have not shown that Taiwan is historically an independent country. In contrast, in round 2 I have shown that Taiwan is indeed a state of China. This is important to realize as I pointed out multiple times that the Taiwan “government” consists out of an ousted oppressive and corrupt government that fled China when the people rose up against them under the leadership of Mao.

It should also be noted that my opponent did not rebut the claims of theft and corruption by the Republic of China. As such my opponents claims that they are a better government and should be awarded a country (for losing and stealing?) is moot. Additionally, by pointing out that countries have dark pasts and then pointing out that the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) has a dark past is illogical. By promoting this point all you have done is assert my argument that Taiwan is a state of China. As such I thank my opponent for strengthening my argument as to why Taiwan is a state of the PRC.

Lastly, how can this be devaluing the UN when the UN does not accept Taiwan (ROC) as an independent country and in fact kicked them out and handed the seat to the rightful government the PRC.(1)

Standing Up to China

It seems this is probably the core of the argument by my opponent which is prefaced with “standing up to China”. This argument is based on faulty history (i.e. From my understanding) and reeks of discrimination against China (i.e. stop China throwing its weight around).

I would also like to point out that I never once in my argument said if Taiwan (ROC) is a nation that the PRC must cease to exist as my opponent has fallaciously said I did. In fact my opponents arguments for this make no sense as he is rebutting an argument that was never made.


My opponent then goes on to state the reason Taiwan should be an independent country is because their GDP is the 18th biggest in the world. This argument is based on the fact that Taiwan is an independent nation which has not been demonstrated by my opponent. Additionally, if we are to look at things this way it should be noted that the State of California is the 8th biggest economy in the world.(2) Does that mean California should be an independent country?


In this debate my opponent has made multiple historically incorrect unsubstantiated claims. Some of these claims even have helped my argument such as the quote from my opponent reference 44 in round 2 “In addition, accusations of Guomintang corruption led to the erosion of popular support for Chiang's regime.”. I would also hope the voters do not get swayed by the immense amount of citations my opponent used as most of them, 3-43, could have been cited using a single source.

In contrast I have showed the logical and historical reasons why Taiwan should remain a state of China. I now hand the debate over to the voters.



Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by BennyW 3 years ago
Tawaian is the real China the PRC is the usurper government.
Posted by ben671176 3 years ago
Even though China believes that it is theirs?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by TrasguTravieso 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Sp/Gr. - "It is ridicules" No. Just. No. Arguments - Apart from a side-discussion about the morality of the genocidal communist government, the debate hinged on this: Con showed China has a legitimate historical claim on Taiwan which Pro did not address. While I remain unconvinced one way or the other, Arguments go to Con.