Written by Yenting Lin.
Image credit: provided by the author.
Beacon of Democracy, Leader in Tech—Taiwan Excluded
As a global leader in technology and democracy, Taiwan remains shut out of many international organisations. The island produces over 60 per cent of the world’s semiconductors, including nearly 90 per cent of the most advanced chips used in artificial intelligence and high-performance computing. At the same time, Taiwan ranks as the most democratic society in Asia, earning top marks for free elections, pluralism, and civil liberties in the 2024 Democracy Index.
Yet, despite its central role and its democratic record, Beijing’s political pressure has kept Taiwan locked out of the system—treated not as a partner, but as a problem. This contradiction raises urgent questions: Why does the international system still allow a misused resolution to justify Taiwan’s exclusion? What political, historical, and institutional forces have shaped this practice? And how has the global meaning of UN Resolution 2758 shifted—between law, power, and the myth? And what would it take to bring Taiwan back—not as a non-state observer, but as a sovereign and equal member of the international community?
From Resolution 2758 to the One China Policy: The Strategy Behind Taiwan’s Exclusion
Taiwan’s exclusion from the United Nations stems from the way one resolution has been politically interpreted and applied. In 1971, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 2758, which recognised the People’s Republic of China as the sole representative of China in the UN and expelled Chiang Kai-shek’s representatives. The resolution said nothing about Taiwan’s status, sovereignty, or future.
Yet, the Chinese government claims Resolution 2758 means Taiwan is part of China and uses it to block Taiwan from joining the UN and its agencies. This claim is often reinforced by Beijing’s push for the “One China Policy,”. But legal records after World War II show a different picture. The Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation were wartime statements, not binding treaties. The San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951 confirmed that Japan gave up its claim to Taiwan but left Taiwan’s future open, with some signatories supporting the idea of self-determination for the Taiwanese people.
China’s pressure campaign goes beyond the United Nations. Taiwan’s diplomatic allies have dropped from over seventy in 1971 to just twelve today, as Beijing uses political and economic deals to isolate Taiwan. Inside the UN, Chinese officials hold key positions and block groups that mention Taiwan without Beijing’s approval.
This pressure also affects ordinary people. Taiwanese students, journalists, and NGOs are often denied entry to UN buildings unless they apply with documents from another country. Taiwan’s exclusion even extends to public health. After attending the World Health Assembly as an observer between 2009 and 2016, Taiwan has been blocked from participating since 2017.
International Debate on Taiwan’s Status: Push Back on China’s Interpretation of UN Resolution 2758
In recent years, more countries and lawmakers have begun challenging the old narrative that Taiwan’s exclusion from global organisations is justified by UN Resolution 2758. Their argument is clear: the resolution only recognised the People’s Republic of China as holding China’s UN seat. It never mentioned Taiwan, never settled Taiwan’s status, and never authorised China to speak for Taiwan in international bodies. The Australian Senate stated this directly in its 2024 motion, saying Resolution 2758 “does not establish the PRC’s sovereignty over Taiwan” nor bar Taiwan from joining the UN or other bodies. The Czech Senate echoed this in 2025, arguing that China’s reading of the resolution distorts international law and undermines the UN’s principles. The Dutch Parliament and the European Parliament said the same — that blocking Taiwan’s participation violates the idea of fair and open global cooperation. Even the United States called China out in the UN Security Council, warning that using Resolution 2758 to shut out Taiwan is a misuse of a decision that never settled Taiwan’s future.
Behind all these actions is a shared argument. Taiwan’s exclusion is based on a false claim about an old resolution. The world is asking why a thriving democracy of 23 million people should be denied a voice in matters like health, security, and trade — especially when the resolution used to justify this exclusion never actually said what Beijing claims it does.
America’s Closest Unofficial Ally: Taiwan
Taiwan does not have official diplomatic relations with the United States. The U.S. still follows its own One China Policy, which means it formally recognises Beijing, not Taipei, as the government of China. But that has not stopped the U.S. from building one of its closest partnerships with Taiwan, one that today goes far beyond formal ties.
The U.S. and Taiwan have worked together since World War II, when the Republic of China was a key ally against Japan. After the Chinese Civil War, the U.S. signed a defence treaty with Taiwan in 1954 and kept military bases on the island. That changed in 1979, when President Carter switched diplomatic recognition to Beijing. Still, this was not the end of the partnership. In response, Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act, which continues to guide U.S.–Taiwan ties. The law requires the U.S. to help Taiwan defend itself and created the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) as a legal workaround to maintain unofficial relations.
In the decades since, cooperation has not only survived, it has deepened. Both Republican and Democratic presidents have strengthened the relationship. President Trump voiced some of the strongest pro-Taiwan views in decades. President Biden has publicly stated several times that the U.S. would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion.
On the legislative side, bipartisan support continues to grow. The Taiwan Travel Act (2018) encouraged more official visits. The CHIPS and Science Act (2022) reinforced U.S.–Taiwan economic ties, especially in the semiconductor industry, where Taiwan leads globally. More recent bills—like the Taiwan Cybersecurity Resilience Act, the Taiwan International Solidarity Act, and the Taiwan Non-Discrimination Act signal that U.S. lawmakers are serious about defending Taiwan’s global space.
The United States remains Taiwan’s strongest global partner. From legislation to security to high-level visits, no other country plays a bigger role in defending Taiwan’s freedom and global standing. But the United States can do more. The Taiwan Non-Discrimination Act gives Congress a real chance to take action. The bill, H.R. 910, was introduced by Representatives Young Kim and Gerry Connolly from the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Indo-Pacific. It calls on the United States to oppose efforts to block Taiwan from joining international organisations. The act makes clear that the 1971 UN resolution settled who represents China, not Taiwan’s status. It also urges American diplomats to defend Taiwan’s fair treatment in global bodies. With support from both parties, this is the strongest move in Congress so far to back Taiwan’s participation. But like any law, it needs political will and public support to make a difference.
The Taiwan Non-Discrimination Act Can Open the Door
A young student once arrived in Geneva, eager to join a United Nations training program. It was a rare opportunity to learn diplomacy inside the halls of the UN and the International Labour Organisation. The student had studied hard, prepared every detail, and travelled halfway around the world.
But at the entrance, the guards stopped them. Their passport wasn’t accepted. They weren’t denied for lack of skill or merit. They were turned away because they were from Taiwan.
Change does not start behind closed doors; it starts when people raise their voices. I know because I was that student outside the UN in Geneva. Taiwan should not have to stand outside anymore.
Yenting Lin is a master’s student in public policy at George Mason University. He holds a BA and BS from National Chung Cheng University in Taiwan. His research focuses on algorithmic hate speech, AI-driven misinformation, and their impact on national security and U.S.–Taiwan–China relations. His writing has appeared in Small Wars Journal, American Intelligence Journal, and The Defence Horizon Journal. The views in this article are his own.
Taiwan Insight 