- The Strategist - https://www.aspistrategist.org.au -
The case for Taiwan: observer status at Interpol’s world congress
Posted By John Coyne on October 30, 2024 @ 16:34
Interpol’s vision statement is ‘connecting police for a safer world’. Yet it isn’t connecting all police and is leaving some people less safe. Excluding Taiwan from Interpol observer status undermines international cooperation and hinders the development of an effective security network to address the challenges posed by modern crime.
Last week, outgoing Interpol secretary general Jurgen Stock said, ‘The world is confronted with a dramatic surge in international organised crime in a way that, definitely, I haven’t seen in my now long 45-year career.’
The escalation of transnational crime, fuelled by technological advancements, poses challenges that no single nation can effectively address alone. The complexities of modern criminal activity necessitate robust international collaboration. Yet, a crucial democratic player that has much experience to share in this security landscape remains sidelined: Taiwan.
As Interpol prepares for its upcoming World Congress in November 2024, the 196 member states—nations committed to collaboration despite ongoing conflicts and geopolitical tensions—must address a critical question: why is Taiwan, a proven champion of global safety, denied observer status? The exclusion undermines Interpol’s principles of international cooperation and its collective ability to combat transnational crime. It’s time for Interpol to rectify this oversight and include Taiwan as an observer in the conversation.
Let’s be clear: many international institutions do not require nation status for members or observers. Interpol is one of them. And Taiwanese society consistently ranks among the safest worldwide. As with the World Health Organization, the refusal to include Taiwan results from China blocking the decision and from other countries being fearful of upsetting it.
If these institutions claim that all that can be done is being done in the name of public health and safety, they’re uttering a known untruth.
Taiwan’s exclusion from Interpol hampers the island’s law enforcement agencies by denying them access to vital real-time intelligence that could enhance efforts to combat crime, domestic and transnational. Without Interpol observer status, Taiwan must rely on indirect information that often arrives too late.
The case of Lisa Lines, an Australian who fled to Taiwan in 2017 after allegedly arranging a violent attack on her ex-husband, illustrates how Tawain’s exclusion from Interpol helps criminals. Interpol issued a red notice—an international request to law enforcement agencies worldwide to locate and provisionally arrest an individual pending extradition. Australian authorities had to send the request through Interpol because Taiwan had (and has) no extradition treaty with Australia.
But Taiwan did not receive the red notice quickly enough. Lines was not arrested until 14 months later, when she travelled to Palau.
Taiwan’s law enforcement consistently demonstrates a commitment to tackling international crime, and Interpol has recognised this. The Interpol Stop Online Piracy initiative recognised Taiwanese police for their efforts against illegal broadcasting, illustrating their valuable insights and experiences.
A lack of observer status at Interpol also severely restricts Taiwan’s ability to contribute to important discussions and initiatives. And Interpol’s members miss out on the possibility of Taiwan providing timely intelligence on emerging criminal methods and alerting them to threats from criminal groups exploiting Taiwanese passports.
Beijing opposes Taiwan’s inclusion in health and safety bodies because it is wants to shift the view of the rest of the world on the status of Taiwan. It fears that Taiwanese participation in Interpol could weaken its attempts to advance its own claims over the self-ruled democracy.
Taiwan’s police can already cooperate directly with law enforcement agencies elsewhere. There is no good reason why it should not do so through Interpol, too.
Interpol was established to facilitate international police cooperation, not to serve as a tool of geopolitics or international relations. Its constitution emphasises the need for mutual assistance among police authorities, a fact that emphasises that its focus is on crime prevention and enforcement, not political manoeuvring.
Excluding Taiwan undermines this foundational principle and weakens the global network essential for addressing threats that cross borders. The 1984 Interpol General Assembly resolution that replaced Taipei with Beijing as the organisation’s representative of China does not preclude other participation by Taiwan. Interpol does in fact have both the authority as well as the responsibility to grant observer status to Taiwan.
As Interpol prepares for its 92nd General Assembly in Glasgow on 4 November, the moment for decisive action has arrived. It should welcome Taiwan as an observer, facilitating the island’s involvement in key meetings and initiatives that shape global policing efforts.
Australia should be a champion for Taiwan’s observer status. Recognising that a collaborative approach is essential for the security of all nations, we must ensure that Taiwan has a voice in global law enforcement dialogues. This is not just about Taiwan, and Interpol mustn’t allow itself to be a pawn in China’s pursuit of global power. It is about building a more effective security network that can adapt to the challenges of modern crime through international cooperation.
Article printed from The Strategist: https://www.aspistrategist.org.au
URL to article: https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-case-for-taiwan-observer-status-at-interpols-world-congress/
Click here to print.
Copyright © 2024 The Strategist. All rights reserved.