AHC: ROC remains on the UN

What if the UN charter had made specific mention that a permanent member would hold their seat indefinitely, without referendum and without being replaced by another body claiming to represent that state?
 
What if the UN charter had made specific mention that a permanent member would hold their seat indefinitely, without referendum and without being replaced by another body claiming to represent that state?
???
"China" deserves a Security Council seat (now, certainly, then, maybe). A small island off the coast? Hardly.

The only reason Taiwan got the seat was because it 'was' China, supposedly. So, no, no way, no how.

Your proposal would have resulted in the same thing. Maybe a year later. It's NOT another 'body claiming to be that state' it IS that state. Sorry.

If they made the wording strong enough, then Winston Churchill would have been able to appoint the UK member until his death, because the Labour government was "another body claiming to represent that state".
 
Well playing Devil's advocate.

Technically the P.R.C. is an illegal association of provinces in open rebellion against the Republic of China, and was treated as such for many years. If they didn't have nuclear weapons and a somewhat shakey relaitionship with Russia I doubt the US would ever have allowed them to claim China's seat on the secruity council.
 
Last edited:
Well playing Devil's advocate.

Technically the P.R.C. is an illegal association of provinces in open rebellion against the Republic of China, and was treated as such for many years. If they didn't have nuclear weapons and a somewhat shakey relaitionship with Russia I doubt the US would ever have allowed them to claim China's seat on the secruity council.

But already the in the 60s, the US China policy was a laughing stock, even (for some) within the US. I remember Mad magazine references to the great empty spot, or some such, south of Russia and west of japan.

If the US insisted on that fiction even longer than it did, the UN would degenerate (even further) into irrelevancy.
 

PhilippeO

Banned
If UN insists on that, we could have a lot more monarchy survives in UN.

Ethiopian Emperor, Iranian Shah, Yemen Imamate etc still hold their seat. and all revolutionary regime that happen after their nation join UN would be unrecognized.
 
If UN insists on that, we could have a lot more monarchy survives in UN.

Ethiopian Emperor, Iranian Shah, Yemen Imamate etc still hold their seat. and all revolutionary regime that happen after their nation join UN would be unrecognized.

And not just that. France would no longer be represented when Charles de Gaulle disbanded the Fourth Republic.
 
The difference is the Republic of China government still exists on Chinese soil not as a Government in Exile living on another countries charity. In a way it represents the situation the Greeks would have been in if Crete held and the Axis set up a pupet government in Athens, or if the Danes had managed to evacuate to Iceland in 1940. It does raise the question of what would have happend to Hong Kong if the R.O.C was still recognised as the Chinese government.
 
Top