Analyse
The claim that cross-strait relations are 'between two sovereign states' contradicts the dominant geopolitical consensus: the UN, U.S., and most nations do not recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state due to the 'One China' policy, though Taiwan operates independently in practice. While Tsai’s assertion reflects Taiwan’s *de facto* self-governance and democratic mandate (e.g., its separate elections, military, and constitution), it omits that no major power formally acknowledges Taiwan’s sovereignty. The statement’s second half—that Taiwan’s future 'must be decided by its 23 million people'—aligns with democratic principles but ignores Beijing’s longstanding claim to territorial sovereignty over Taiwan, backed by its 2005 Anti-Secession Law authorizing force if Taiwan declares formal independence.
Achtergrond
The cross-strait status quo stems from the 1949 Chinese Civil War, after which the losing Kuomintang (KMT) retreated to Taiwan, establishing a rival government to the PRC. Since then, Taiwan has never formally declared independence, and the PRC has insisted on eventual 'reunification,' while Taiwan’s political parties (including Tsai’s DPP) increasingly assert a distinct identity. The U.S. and others maintain 'strategic ambiguity,' supporting Taiwan’s defense without endorsing sovereignty, to avoid provoking China.
Samenvatting verdict
Tsai Ing-wen’s 2020 statement frames Taiwan as a sovereign state, but its international status remains legally disputed, with most countries (including the U.S.) officially recognizing the 'One China' policy under which Taiwan is *de jure* part of China, albeit with *de facto* autonomy.