Abstract
China and Taiwan’s enduring dispute stems from a fundamental disagreement over Taiwan’s sovereignty. Drawing on binary conceptions of sovereignty in international law, the Chinese government argues that there can only be one legitimate Chinese sovereign—and that China is this sovereign. Meanwhile, Taiwan’s current government maintains that the Republic of China (Taiwan’s official title) is itself a sovereign, independent entity. As the two governments cling fiercely to their positions, bilateral diplomacy has ceased, and the risk of catastrophic war has risen.
This article argues that international law nonetheless offers the conceptual tools needed to build peace in the Taiwan Strait by supplying a doctrine of “sovereignty” that is more elastic and capacious than either government’s narrative reflects. Drawing on an extensive collection of primary source documents, this article shows how reconceiving of sovereignty as something elastic and divisible, in line with a long-established but oft-neglected practice in international law, could create new opportunities for peacebuilding in the Taiwan Strait. To develop this argument, this article first provides a historical account of sovereignty in international law. Next, the article offers a comprehensive analysis of alternative conceptions of sovereignty in legal arrangements around the world and their manifestations at various points in history. Finally, it proposes threads of a new sovereignty in the Taiwan Strait. The article closes by suggesting that its critical account of sovereignty can unearth possibilities for the peaceful management of sovereignty disputes elsewhere in the world, and for a broader transformation of sovereignty in international law.
html
Included in
Accessibility Request
Some items in this repository were created or digitized prior to implementation of the accessibility standards under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and are preserved in their original, unmodified state for research, reference, or historical recordkeeping. In accordance with the ADA Title II Final Rule, the College provides accessible versions of archival materials upon request. To request a version of a file or resource, please submit an Accessible File Request Form.
