Originally Posted by
Ripton
Wasn't the ROC / PRC thing resolved with Resolution 2758?
Given that China has the veto and can use it when it please, do they ned a second voter on their side or would they perhaps prefer to be able to name their price when exercising the veto on Russia's behalf?
Actually, the ICJ 1971 opinion [1] found that in the same case of South Africa, the UN acted incorrectly. For whatever reason, Resolution 2758 has not been challenged as being unlawful by ROC/Taiwan, but the weight of law is on their side. There is no common law basis for their position by the action of the grossly erroneous UNR2758 of 1971. That is a matter for the ICJ once again.
[1]
REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS, ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS LEGAL CONSEQUENCES FOR STATES OF THE CONTINUED PRESENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA IN NAMIBIA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA) NOTWITHSTANDING SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 276 (1970) ADVISORY OPINION OF 21 JUNE 1971
https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files...V-01-00-EN.pdf